Vulcan's Hammer: V-force Aircraft & Weapons Projects Since 1945

As an appetizer, I will post two links to scanned pictures showing the "Vulcan "Missileer" concept.
http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o1/lenny100/vulcan%20missileer/2011-07-25-1612-26_edited.jpg
http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o1/lenny100/vulcan%20missileer/2011-07-25-1644-03_edited.jpg
I found them at our sister forum Whatifmodelers.

Source: http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,33106.msg516299.html#msg516299


Due to copyright reasons and forums rules, I will not attach these pictures to this post.
 
It was allegedly fathers' day in Australia on Sunday just past; and though I'm in Canada, my origins inspired my wife to practically order me to buy myself something nice in the way of a book.

So it's on the way, and I await with bated breath (Sep 14) here and I love it. My first detailed comment, looking at the pictures, is "Yep, some of this looks very Thunderbirds Are Go-ish." (or vice versa). And now onwards to chapter 3!
 
Hi Sealordlawrence,

Sorry for the delay have only just found your request,
Kew, PRO and Hendon. There were reports about it on the wireless at the time.
There was a mention in an article about the Belfast or VC10 in RAF Flying Review circa middle sixties that stated there had been a wide body variant of an early Vickers aircraft proposed by Vickers for Blue Streak and also Titan but its a long time ago.
There was a comment on the wireless to the effect that the VC1000 could have been used with the minimum alteration, break in the fuselage, that stuck in the mind, this was some time later with a report about the Belfast.



sealordlawrence said:
Spark,

What is your source for such a multiplicity of V.1000 variants? Were they Vickers proposals or RAF requirements? In all the Bomber Command history I have read to date there seems to be no space for such dedicated aircraft as a support forces either time wise or in terms of airframe requirements. The excess of Valiants seems to have been more that sufficient. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
 
Chris,


Once again, thank your for producing such an outstanding book, it really is a pleasure to read. I have been wondering whether when you were researching the Avro 730/Red Drover you came across any reference to the computer navigation/bombing system that would have had to have been built to go with it? Given the trajectory of technology at the time, and the weight sensitivity of the aircraft, I am sure that it would have been digital? Perhaps AEI were looking at developing digital version of the bombing an navigation computer in the V-bombers?
 
Thankyou very much and I'm glad you like it.

Haven't dug into the avionics, the PhD boys are looking after that, but the first mention I've seen of digital electronics is related to the Blue Envoy SAM guidance system from Ferranti and another project for a "high-speed digital computer" called Cobber that I think dates from around 1958, possibly for AWRE.

The official history of the OR.330 states that EMI were the MoS lead contractor on Red Drover and apart from the limited material on the Vickers SP.4 radar, I haven't seen any other electronics companies, such as AEI, mentioned, but as I say, I haven't looked.

Has always seemed that the demise of many hi-tech UK projects occurred just as the electronic revolution started. As Lord Gnome would say "Are they by any chance related?"

Chris
 
Chris,

Thank you for the response. It seems to have been the Admiralty that were the real military drivers behind digital in the UK, they seem to have had a number of projects in particular working with Elliots, the Elliots Nicholas digital computer was also used for a guided bomb project amongst other things. I believe Stephen Hasting mentions in his 1966 book that the Air Ministry had sponsored basic research into airborne digital computers in 1956-7.

Some intensive reading has taught me the following, the RAE sponsored research into airborne digital computers lead to the GEC Digital Experimental Airborne Navigator (DEXAN) digital navigation computer that is described as being similar to VERDAN though faster. DEXAN first appears appears in in public in 1960 but in cooperation with the RAE appears to have been under development for sometime, a ground based version called Hydra was used by the RAE to test inertial navigation systems. GEC developed DEXAN into the 719 that may have been kept out of the market by the Elliot 920 family (which post TSR-2 seems to end up in everything).

I have seen a reference to the Avro 730 using Doppler and inertial navigation (seems logical) in addition to Red Drover. That would be an impressive set up for the strategic recce role but I still can not help thinking that the aircrafts systems would need some sort adaptation for the bombing role, the large gap between the two fields of view provided by the Red Drover system- some sort of forward/downward looking array in the nose perhaps?
 
Last edited:
Attempt to post 3.


Is'nt there a downward aerial? Sure I saw one in the book somewhere.


Forward set would be cramped ahead of the canards, limited I think.


DEXAN sounds interesting.
 
I shall have to check when I get home. Space would be tight, but then Convair got the AN/APB-2 into the nose of the B-58 which was less than spacious. Another possible navigation system might be automatic-astro; it was all the rage for US manned platforms in the time frame but apart from some early 50s TRE research appears to have passed the UK by until Skybolt came along.


What seems obvious to me is that the NBS system in the Mk2 V-bombers had reached the end of its development potential and something new, digital and impressive would be required. Some consideration seems to have been given to suing SLAR's for v-bomber navigation and one assumes that at least some thought was being given to new nav-attack systems around the OR.336 and RB.156 requirements...?
 
This book :-

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Moving-Targets-Elliott-Automation-Computer-Computing/dp/1848829329/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329205638&sr=1-2

MIGHT be of interest. As you will see it is a history of Elliotts post war until the 1960s and beyond.

I understand the first couple of chapters is about naval work in the immediate post-war period (MRS system) but that the rest covers the move into electronic (analogue and digital) computing which MIGHT cover some of what people here are more interested in.



Quote from Amazon page :-

Product Description

Review From the reviews:

“Moving Targets details the history of Elliott Brothers in 1947 through to the last vestige of those families of Elliott’s computers in GEC Computers in the 1990s. The title of the book Moving Targets is surely a reference to the recurring technical and marketing themes described by the book. … there is no doubt that the whole book is exceptionally well researched to a superb accuracy. … the book contains many interesting pictures.” (Roger Newey, Resurrection - The Bulletin of the Computer Conservation Society, Issue 55, Summer, 2011)

Product Description

This book charts the take-up of IT in Britain, as seen through the eyes of one company. It examines how the dawn of the digital computer age in Britain took place for different applications, from early government-sponsored work on secret defence projects, to the growth of the market for Elliott computers for civil applications. Features: charts the establishment of Elliott’s Borehamwood Research Laboratories, and the roles played by John Coales and Leon Bagrit; examines early Elliott digital computers designed for classified military applications and for GCHQ; describes the analogue computers developed by Elliott-Automation; reviews the development of the first commercial Elliot computers and the growth of applications in industrial automation; includes a history of airborne computers by a former director of Elliott Flight Automation; discusses the computer architectures and systems software for Elliott computers; investigates the mergers, takeovers and eventual closure of the Borehamwood laboratories.


From the Back Cover

The Elliott-Automation company was an active participant in the birth of the information age in Britain. By 1961, the company was supplying 50% of the digital computers delivered to UK customers in that year. Yet by the end of that decade, Elliott-Automation had effectively disappeared in a flurry of takeovers, leaving little apparent trace of the technical excellence that had once characterised the name Elliott. Moving Targets charts the gradual take-up of information technology in Britain, as seen through the eyes of one innovative company. The book examines how the dawn of the digital computer age in Britain took place at various times for different applications, from early government-sponsored work on secret defence projects, to the growth of the market for Elliott computers for civil applications. Topics and features: Charts the establishment of Elliott’s Borehamwood Research Laboratories in 1946, and the roles played by John Coales and Leon Bagrit in reviving an ailing companyExamines early Elliott digital computers designed for classified military applications and for GCHQ, such as the Elliott 152, 153 and OEDIPUSDescribes the analogue computers developed by Elliott-Automation, including the giant TRIDACReviews the development of the first commercial Elliott computers, the growth of applications in industrial automation, and the competition offered by rival manufacturers in Britain Includes a history of airborne computers up to 1988, written by a former director of Elliott Flight Automation Discusses the evolution of computer architectures and systems software for the Elliott 800, 900 and 4100 series computersInvestigates the mergers, takeovers and eventual closure of the Borehamwood laboratories, and the demise of Elliott-Automation and its successors, ICL and GECThis unique text will be of great interest to historians of technology and business, and will also appeal to the general reader curious about the emergence of digital computing in Britain and the work of the previously unsung computer pioneers of the Elliott-Automation laboratories at Borehamwood. Simon Lavington is Emeritus Professor of Computer Science at the University of Essex. Among his many publications is the book Early British Computers.
 
Phil,


Thanks, I already have that book and I must admit that it is excellent, it is however very focussed (cant blame the book or author, that was the intention) on Elliots with only passing reference to what everybody else was doing at the time. It is a fascinating book however and I would recommend it to all.
 
OK chaps, time to put your money where your mouths are.

Vulcan's Hammer is going for a reprint and you have the opportunity point out your favourite ytops and faux pas.

Let me know soon or forever hold your peace.

Thanks

Chris

Yes' I already have the B-5B and dihedral confusion sorted out.
 
Well, since you seem keen to have things done chop-chop, let me have them now.

Crecy are keen to do the changes, so lets not disappoint them.

Thanks

Chris
 
Game? Oh no, this is serious. What you find will be in print for posterity.

Chris
 
Congratulations on the reprint. That must mean the book is a success which it certainly deserves to be!
 
Will be available a pdf with updates for 1st Edition owners?

I hate when a year after the first edition a second much revised edition is released!
Editors should come with a solution for this situation. Now with ebooks it should be possible to access the updated work for a reduced price.

Not a bad idea to enjoy an aircraft guide updated forever
 
Actually, since you mention it, there's nowt new in it, just the typos corrected. So it isn't a second edition, just a straight reprint with my mistakes corrected. A new edition would have some tasty new pofflers in it.

Chris
 
Hi,
Vickers V1000?


CJGibson said:
Actually, since you mention it, there's nowt new in it, just the typos corrected. So it isn't a second edition, just a straight reprint with my mistakes corrected. A new edition would have some tasty new pofflers in it.

Chris
Click to expand...
 
Better buy Vulcan's Hammer and find out. Or VC10 - AEW, Pofflers and Other Unbuilt Variants.

...and the mystery poffler that prompted me to quote Unlucky Alf is....Atlantique! While another, rather tasty one, which at the time of writing Vulcan's Hammer I had read about but had no hard evidence of was...HS.1011 - Blighty's very own Blackjack. I'm awaiting the arrival of drawings.

Chris
 
Chris, I have both Vulcan's Hammer and Battle Flight - I just haven't had the time to give them a close read yet - they are 'treats in store' for me - but a hint on exactly what a 'poffler' is would be appreciated!

The HS.1011 sounds extremely interesting.
 
http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=57686

Google is your friend as well.

Chris
 
.


Apart from the fact that the Shorts Belfasts shouldn't have been scrapped any way, did anyone think of using them as Pofflers ?


.
 
Belslow could haul any two of crew, fuel, or load. Over the Turkish Alps, any one. Pofflers need all 3.
 
I did use Google, but call me unimaginative I couldn't see what 'being mean or annoying' had to do with aircraft design.
 
LAST CALL FOR EDITS! It goes to print tomorrow. Speak now or forever haud yer wheesht.

Phil - Re Belfast - I assume you don't have a copy of VC10 or Vulcan's Hammer. if you do...Three graphs on why not, some spiel and a nice photo of a Belfast on a damp morning on pages 120 - 123.

Ken is correct, Belfast would have struggled to lift Skybolt high enough to provide decent range for the missile . VC10, Vulcan, Victor, Trident and the HS1011 did. Atlantic? Well, I did laugh.

Chris
 
Typo competition is now closed. The winner is Pathology Doc, who as the only competitor, wins a signed copy of The Air Staff and AEW.

Chris
 
Hi
I lent my copy, not yet returned. Such a superb book it would be a sin not to record the fact that it was intended at one time that variants of the Vickers V 1000 would operate as support aircraft not only in the transport role but in the Tanker and dedicated Radio Air Warfare roles. The V-1000 was expected to fly at the same altitudes as the V-Bombers, but faster in the case of the Vickers Valiant. It’s a long time ago but I think I remember the Tanker variant was cancelled some six months before the final axe. Note at the time the V1000 could operate from any major civil airfield of the period and the only civil runway that could have been used by the Boeing KC- 135 was at Heathrow.
A superb book and an example to every one on how to write.



CJGibson said:
Typo competition is now closed. The winner is Pathology Doc, who as the only competitor, wins a signed copy of The Air Staff and AEW.

Chris
Click to expand...
 
V1000 is in chapter 7 of Battle Flight. You can always write up the RCM V1000 and post your thinking here if you feel it needs better coverage, I'm sure many forum members would be interested.

Chris
 
CJGibson said:
Typo competition is now closed. The winner is Pathology Doc, who as the only competitor, wins a signed copy of The Air Staff and AEW.

Chris
Click to expand...


Deadlines were too tight for me to take part. Bah! I'll have to concentrate on proof-reading that text for a new book I got sent recently :)
 
Chris,

I was re-reading chapters four and five today and I was struck by your enthusiasm for the Avro W.110 design to OR.1149, understandable to me given the demands of the requirement, but I was left with a couple of questions:

1) Alternative engines, it seems that the Armstrong Siddeley P.176 would would have been an ideal candidate for the W.110 though I am assuming it was cancelled by the time W.110 was drawn. Were any other engines considered?

2) Carriage by the Vulcan, at 45ft long this was a big missile, is there any indication of how it would have been carried by the Vulcan? I note that the nose of the 10ft shorter Blue Steel comes right to the rear of the nose undercarriage bay meaning there is no room to push the missile forwards and the rear of Blue Steel ends at the rear of the Vulcan bomb bay. I can understand the convergent-divergent nozzle of the underslung engine compartment protruding underneath the rear fuselage behind the bomb bay but a rough measurement of the diagram on pg.101 suggests this is only 5ft which still seems to leave the W.110 fuselage 5ft too long to fit in the Vulcan bomb bay. Have I missed something?

Thanks again for a great book!
 
"...Would necessitate greater modification to the carriage aircraft," - Avro WRD report.

The W.110 dates from mid 1957, and appears in report WRB.4 in August 1957, which would post-date the P.176 as it was canned in April 1957. Gyron Junior was pretty much all that was available in the class. Info on the P.176 is in "A View from Ansty" by David Williams, RRHT No.25. Only a couple of pages but better than nowt.

Carriage problems had cropped up on the earlier W.107, which was even larger. The W.110 "length at centreline" was actually 42ft and so one suggestion was to reverse the retraction of the nose undercarriage to have it retracting forwards, or having it retract straight up, freeing up around 10ft of ventral real estate. The W.110 was installed nose-down as shown in the drawing from the RAF Museum.

One way to address all this was the Z.43, a W.110 scaled to 35ft. Neither the W.110 nor Z.43 could be realistically carried by Victor, which also needed the nose undercarriage moved and nose-down installation, which led ultimately to the W.110's demise.

Chris
 

Attachments

  • W110.png
    W110.png
    309 KB · Views: 342
The RCM V.1000 - I can shed some light on it as I pulled the OR today.

V.1000 operating with Valiants: If fitted with Conway engines, the V.1000 had a maximum ceiling 3000ft below the 'standard' Valiant.

What OR.315 says

As the primary requirement is for a troop carrying capable of over-flying lightly held enemy territory....

Radio warfare version

RCM kit to be interchangeable for fitting in a standard transport (aye, right)

Window launchers to OR.3525
RCM aerials of the 'all round looking' type with continuous frequency coverage from 2.5mcs to 12000mcs
a radiation of at least 2kW
radar warning devices to detect launch of air or ground-launched GW covering the entire lower and rear hemispheres
VT fuze countermeasure to OR.3543
adequate generators to power all this

Now, the following threw me completely as I have never heard of this and don't know what it's about.

5.38 Provision is to be made for a radio isotope stowage in one wing tip.

Is this for medical material for X-rays or is it for you-know-whats? I favour the former, but as I say, never heard of this before and I'm sure Occam's razor applies.

Chris
 
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5107294/


With all the recent concerns about radioactivity in the news. I came across this set of old BOAC promo videos( interesting views of a by-gone era of air travel). In the 2nd episode:- At approx 2.07 minutes into the film; its shows radioactive isotopes being carried as cargo in the wing-tips of passenger planes.I have never heard of this before.
Question:- Do airlines still carry radioactive isotopes? Where would they store these isotopes?
Click to expand...
 
Well oil beef hooked!

Offshore we keep the sources in bunkers, but move them about in 'pigs' like that one. That film explains everything.

A new one on me.

Ta

chris
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom