Handley Page Victor

[jcf]

Only during mating season.  




This appears to be shortly after touchdown.

Interestingly the following is mentioned on page 505 of 'Handley Page Aircraft since 1907':
"...on 3 November (1953) assistant test pilot, K.W. Dalton-Golding reached Mach .88 at 47,500 ft and obtained smooth deceleration on extending the rear fuselage dive-brakes, which had had larger strakes added to reduce turbulence."
page 507:
" ...Mach 0.95 was reached twice during the trials and the rear fuselage air-brakes were effective throughout the entire range of speed and altitude and free from buffet,... "

Jon

[Mossie]

I remember reading an article some time ago (RAF Yearbook I think) about displaying the Shackleton.  The Shack had pretty monstrous speed brakes itself & they could be used in flight for emergency descent or very tight manouvers.  It also looked pretty impressive in display, the pilot would stomp on the brakes, throttle back & point the nose straight at the ground, the old girl would appear to stop in mid air for several seconds as she slowed down.

One day he got a new crew member at short notice.  The guy was a bit up tight, but the consumate professional, very dillegantly carrying out his duties.  The pilot had neglected to brief him fully on the maneouver (wether by accident or on purpose I never worked out!).  The professional facade broke when he felt the Shack lurch to a quick stop & found himself looking straight at the ground from only a few hundred feet up!  It apparently took a few hours & several Whiskys before he got himself back together!

[lenny100]

look about 2 min 24 seconds  in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO-KaDtzmcU

[Captain Canada]

Wicked stuff, Lenny ! Thanks for that link.....and thanks for all the responses, guys !

 

[kitnut617]

Hi,

I working my way through the first volumne of two books about the HP Victor written by Roger R.Brooks.  These are not light reading, being full of technical data and other related stuff.  In one of the early chapters there is printed what looks like the full Specification No. B35/46 for the aircraft dated 24th Jan 1947, and reading through it I was amazed to see what was required for the defence of the plane. It says that it had to have attack warning devices and controls for counter measures such as proximity fuse exploders and radar warning for ground or air launched weapons . This document was written barely 14 months after WW.II and the book says was a few months delayed, so was started in 1946.

Now my question is, what on earth was available such as homing or guided weapons with proximity fuses, at this time.  Or is this a very far sighted document at what might be expected.  If the RAF was thinking along these lines, did they actually have weapons like this?

Robert

[jcf]

Hi,

I working my way through the first volumne of two books about the HP Victor written by Roger R.Brooks.  These are not light reading, being full of technical data and other related stuff.  In one of the early chapters there is printed what looks like the full Specification No. B35/46 for the aircraft dated 24th Jan 1947, and reading through it I was amazed to see what was required for the defence of the plane. It says that it had to have attack warning devices and controls for counter measures such as proximity fuse exploders and radar warning for ground or air launched weapons . This document was written barely 14 months after WW.II and the book says was a few months delayed, so was started in 1946.

Now my question is, what on earth was available such as homing or guided weapons with proximity fuses, at this time.  Or is this a very far sighted document at what might be expected.  If the RAF was thinking along these lines, did they actually have weapons like this?

Robert

Proximity fuses on anti-aircraft shells were an existing and genuine threat, they performed extremely well against the V-1.
It is probable that the requirement was for a capability to counteract proximity fused artillery shells i.e. make them detonate
at a 'safe' distance, rather than guided/homing weapons per se.

Heavy AAA was still seen as a genuine threat/strength in the immediate post-war period.

Jon

[kitnut617]

Yes the AA would definitely be a problem but another requirement for the Victor was it had to fly at 45,000ft or higher.  Even Heavy AA couldn't reach that height could they?

[Nick]

The Germans were experimenting with airborne radio and wire guided missiles in 1945 and I think working with infrared or heatseeking guidance in their labs. They certainly worked on an air-launched TV guided missile at that time too, the Henschel Hs293D.

The RAF probably took that knowledge on board when writing the proposal.

[jcf]

Yes the AA would definitely be a problem but another requirement for the Victor was it had to fly at 45,000ft or higher.  Even Heavy AA couldn't reach that height could they?

Aircraft requirements cover the gamut, and one doesn't necessarily rule out another.

Jon

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I know the tankers had their wings clipped slightly so adding this back would seem to be the hardest part.

Were the wings clipped to reduce stress on the wings to prolong the airframe life?  Or was there another reason for the wing clipping?  If the Victor was to perform a low altitude mission the longer wingspan might have been unnecessary so clipping the wings may have had an added benefit. 

No reason to increase wing span if you are going low and under the radar.  A good WHIF idea for the Matchbox Victor kit if the bomb bay can be opened up to show of a few iron bombs or some instant sunshine.

[Mossie]

Yeah, the main reason was to reduce stress on the airframe.  For the move to low level, the Victor was phased out of the bombing role, especially once it was seen what the new flight regime did to the Valiant fleet.  The Vulcan took this on the low level bombing role as it's rigid delta was much more suited to the stresses.

The Handley Page HP.99 (sometimes referred to as the 'Daisycutter') was a project for a low level bomber.  It would have used a similar fuselage to the Victor, but mated to a shorter cranked (as opposed to the Victors crescent) wing with underslung engine pods & a fuse mounted tail:


I borrowed the pic from this Britmodeller thread where our own Overkiller is building it:
http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?s=5510050762dc955d36f11ca0556b8e3a&showtopic=19113

[GTX]

Any one know if these (http://www.sangereng.fsnet.co.uk/V%20Bombers.htm) are available yet?

Regards,

Greg

[ChernayaAkula]

How about a scale-o-rama Victor fighter? 

[Mossie]

There was a kind of fighter version of the Victor, the Handley Page HP.88.  The Victors crescent wing & tail was tested on a Supermarine Type 510 (the 510 eventually became the Swift) fuselage.   It was intended purely as a test bed, not as a fighter prototype.  Unfortunately, the only HP.88 broke up in mid air, killing the pilot.

[GTX]

Has anyone got a good quality 3-view drawing of the Victor?  I've got a few ideas I'd like to illustrate.

Regards,

Greg