WI more Canberra's replaced by Valiants?

[Rule of cool]

In 1960 some 64 Canberra B2 & B6 in 4 sqns based in Britain and assigned to SACEUR were replaced by 24 Valiants in 3 sqns. Despite the significant decrease in numbers this was considered a net benefit because of the Valiant's all weather capabilities. By 1964 the RAF still had 9 sqns of Canberra B6, B8, B15, B16 in service:

• 4 - RAFG.
• 4 - NEAF.
• 1 - FEAF.

WI the RAF also replaced other Canberras with a smaller number of Valiants in the early 60s? I'd think the best candidates would be the 4 sqns in the NEAF, maybe going from 32 Canberras in 4 sqns to ~20 Valiants in 2 sqns.

How would this affect the Valiant fatigue repair programme that had started by 1964? How would this affect the TSR2 project? If the Valiants were still in service by 1967 would their presence in Cyprus have any impact on the 6 Day War?

 

[alertken]

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/replacing-saceurs-raf-valiants.31273/

(This post is Hist, not AH, to explain why Valiant was not/could not be the prime Canberra replacement).

Bombs.

Ike was incandescent that UK/France had used his kit (e.g.: ex-USS Langley), intended to deal with Reds, to invade Egypt, 11/56. He also had a Trumpian need to reduce $ spend in Defence of Europe, by encouraging us all to deploy more liveware.

So, UK Mutual Defence Agreement ("Bermuda"), 27/3/57: Project E loan Bombs/Thor IRBM/etc; extended 16/12/57 by the offer of a NATO Common Stockpile (Italy first, 1/3/59, Honest John SSM). This would reach 7,000 warheads, non-US Forces on dual key schemes.

From 2/7/59 48 would be Mk.7 in 9 & 12 Sqns/Coningsby (LABS-qualified) and 139 Sqn/Upwood Canberra B.6 (gravity delivered, Bombs loaded at Coningsby). (The 64 number incs 35 Sqn, Canberra B.2, along for the ride as decoy, no sting, HE only).

1/7/61: the 48 SACEUR targets were covered by 3x8 Valiants, each 2xMk.28. 15/9/60 RAFG Canberra B(I)6/8 had 4x16 Mk.7: 64, to rise 8/66 to 128, 4x16x2xB-43 to 12/69.

That permitted UK AW industry to do Big Bangs for Skybolt, then Polaris. Production of fission Red Beard and fusion Yellow Sun Mk.1, both, ah, fraught, could be reduced to (RN CVs and) NEAF(32 Bombs)/FEAF (8 Bombs) (US' Custodials issue made deployment at sea and in sandpits and jungle too hard). So, why 1961/62 did we modify Canberra B.6 - B.15/16, not Valiants, which we put to K, ECM, PR?

OP suggests NBS made Valiant more effective than Canberra's Mk.1 eyeball. More range too, though probably not needed: a pprune poster had FEAF targets as cross-paths in the jungle. But...5 crew, plus painful Engineering...Canberra cheaper in every way, for brief use before TSR.2 was to arrive from 1967-ish. Until 12/62 we thought we would need all RAF's brightest and best for Skybolt Vulcans.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Link to the Opening Post.

FWIW (1) A Valiant carried 2 atom bombs and a Canberra could carry one so therefore the number of targets was that could be attacked was theoretically reduced from 64 to 48. That's according to Wynn in "RAF Nuclear Deterrent Forces" who (as you wrote in the OP) said the Valiants had all-weather capability, the Canberras didn't and that was the reason for the change.

FWIW (2) The peak strength of the Valiant Force was a UE of 72 in 9 squadrons of 8 aircraft (7 medium bomber, one LRPR & one ECM squadron). This was reduced to 6 squadrons (3 TBF, 2 tanker & one LRPR) between 1960 and 1963. Therefore, you could keep the 3 squadrons that were disbanded (two in 1962 & one in 1963) and have them replace some of the Canberra light bombers.

FWIW (3) According to Wynn in "RAF Nuclear Deterrent Forces" the running cost of one Valiant was equal to the running cost of 3 Canberras. 64 ÷ 3 = 21 which because Valiant squadrons had a UE of 8 aircraft was rounded up to 24. The 4 Canberra squadrons in RAFG had a UE of 12 aircraft each and the rest had a UE of 8 which made a total UE of 88. Using Wynn's formula the 24 aircraft in 3 squadrons disbanded 1962-63 IOTL could replace 72 of the 88 Canberras.

FWIW (4) Except the 32 Canberra light bombers (in 4 squadrons of 8) of the Akrotiri Strike wing were replaced by 16 Vulcan B.2s (in 2 squadrons of 8) in 1969 IOTL. That's a one-for-two substitution rather than one-for three. Therefore, the 2 Valiant medium bomber squadrons that disbanded in 1962 IOTL could have instead been transferred to Cyprus to re-equip the Akrotiri Strike Wing and they would in turn be replaced by the Vulcan B.2s in 1969. Except, if the Valiants were still withdrawn in 1965 they'd be replaced by redundant Vulcan B.1s until they could be replaced by Vulcan B.2s. IOTL replacing the Valiants in the TBF with redundant Vulcan B.1s was considered and the money was available, but IIRC from Wynn it was decided that the money would be better spent elsewhere.

FWIW (5) That leaves the 8 ECM Valiants in No. 18 squadron that IOTL was disbanded on 31.03.63 and I can think of the following alternatives.

1. Convert it to a TBF squadron in Bomber Command so 32 Valiants (each carrying two bombs) replace 64 Canberras (each carrying one bomb). So the number of targets that can be attacked is still 64. Or at least it is a one-for-one replacement in theory.
2. Make it a medium bomber squadron and transfer it to Akrotiri to reinforce the 2 Valiant squadrons that in FWIW (4) were sent to Cyprus in 1962.
3. Make it a medium bomber squadron and transfer it to FEAF to replace its Canberra light bomber squadron. In addition to being a more capable nuclear bomber he hot war role (all-weather, greater range & two bombs so (in theory) double the number of targets). It would be more useful in the warm & cold war roles too because it could carry 21,000lb of HE instead of 6,000lb of HE and AFAIK could loiter for longer.
4. Convert it to a tanker squadron to reinforce the 2 Valiant medium bomber squadrons which became tanker squadrons on 01.04.62.

Of the four options I prefer converting it into a tanker squadron, with a fourth TBF squadron being my second choice, sending it to FEAF is my third choice and sending it to NEAF is my fourth.

 

[Rule of cool]

Except the 32 Canberra light bombers (in 4 squadrons of 8) of the Akrotiri Strike wing were replaced by 16 Vulcan B.2s (in 2 squadrons of 8) in 1969 IOTL. That's a one-for-two substitution rather than one-for three. Therefore, the 2 Valiant medium bomber squadrons that disbanded in 1962 IOTL could have instead been transferred to Cyprus to re-equip the Akrotiri Strike Wing and they would in turn be replaced by the Vulcan B.2s in 1969. Except, if the Valiants were still withdrawn in 1965 they'd be replaced by redundant Vulcan B.1s until they could be replaced by Vulcan B.2s. IOTL replacing the Valiants in the TBF with redundant Vulcan B.1s was considered and the money was available, but IIRC from Wynn it was decided that the money would be better spent elsewhere.

This sounds like what I was thinking.

Valiants wouldn't totally replace Canberra, there's too much in Canberra favour to make that happen. Displacement of a few is a different matter and could ease the transition to the TSR2.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

This sounds like what I was thinking.

What would you do with No. 18 Squadron?

• My first choice is still to make it the third tanker squadron.
• My second choice is still to transfer it from the MBF to the TBF so there's a (theoretical) one-for-one replacement of the Canberra light bombers in the UK.

In either case they could be sent to reinforce NEAF/CENTO or FEAF/SEATO if required.

Valiants wouldn't totally replace Canberra, there's too much in Canberra favour to make that happen. Displacement of a few is a different matter and could ease the transition to the TSR2.

Correct. There are also the scores of PR Canberras which you didn't mention in the OP. However, I think you should make this a TL where the RAF is forced to buy Buccaneers (with better avionics) instead of TSR.2s from the word go.

 

[Rule of cool]

While my nebulous thinking is heading towards a more successful Buccaneer the RAF really does need a state of the art tactical/theatre strike aircraft, which means either TSR2 or F111. I have a feeling that if it was acknowledged early on that the TSR2 would be replacing Valiants at half the locations the increasing costs would be understood. Further with less Canberras to replace and more V bombers consolation prizes like Phantom, AFVG and Buccaneers wouldn't be seen as acceptable.

I don't know about the spare Valiant sqn, some TSR2 sqns would be tasked with recce, and presumably the TSR2 would have ECM capability, so if it isn't made into tankers then it might fade away.