Handley Page Victor Development & Projects

Re: Handley Page Victor projects

Does anyone know the actual year when the Conway RCo. 17 engines of 92kN were actually fitted to a Victor? When were the first Victor B.2R thus equipped delivered to the RAF?

I seem to recall that the Victor was developed with a stronger structure, and thus would have perhaps been better equipped to handle the fatigue problem if the stronger structure was kept. Was this stronger structure a post prototype idea, and if so, when? Or was it the original design that was lightened later before service entry?
 
Kaiser,

My understanding is that the RCo17 entered service almost immediately after the B2- so very early 60s, probably 62. Could you elaborate on the stronger structure?

On the previous page GTX kindly posted an image of the Victor using RATO pods. Unlike the RATO pods used by the Valiant which had the DeHavilland Super Sprite DSpr.4 (cancelled in October1960 following an expenditure of £850,000*) the RATO pods for the Victor and Vulcan used the DeHavilland Spectre DSpe.4 (also cancelled in October 1960 following an expenditure of £5.75 million*). Flight produced a detailed two page article about the Spectre RATO pods:

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1958/1958 - 0170.html

Furthermore, the image posted above (also kindly by GTX) which is labelled Victor III mentions the Conway 6. Such a designation would come significantly before the Conways ultimately used on the B.2 (for reference the Conway 5 was for the Vickers VC.7/V.1000 cancelled in 1955) so I suspect that this is a Phase III proposal made just after the decision to move away from the Sapphire. However, it should be noted that in BSP Jet bombers it is stated that the Phase III engines were the Olympus. The ultimate Victor B.2 was the Phase IIA.

*These expenditure figures cover all the variants, not just the RATO ones.

With regard to the strategic recce version, according to 'Bombers of the West' by Bill Gunston the Red Neck SLAR was one of at least two systems that were left out of the final Victor SR.2; does anybody have any idea what the other system(s) was that Bill Gunston was referring to?
 
Last edited:
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

I visited Radlett 10/1/63 when the last 4 B.2 new builds were being assembled. 6 B.2s were back to be "brought to current production standard" and 6 were in for "Autoland mod.", which was Blue Steel/B.2R. I have 139 Sqdn as effective with Blue Steel from 24/10/63 and 100 Sqdn from early-1964.

Most oddly for a prime Deterrent source, the adjacent bay had the Herald line with Customer reps everywhere, including Royal Arab Air Force (RJAF), who could not have been positive vetted.
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

Have you seen these Victor drawing sources?
http://www.albentley-drawings.com/handley_page.htm
for the CGI build I commissioned here:
3 Milviz blog enties..
http://www.milviz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=512
http://www.milviz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=517
http://www.milviz.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=519


No cockpit built yet as no one would complete the photographic task
on the last remaining Victor.. oh, and to attempt such a task,
as to which era cockpit to build... was a challenge in its self.
The best reference I have are the 2 book volumes by Roger R Brooks on the Victor.
( just search ebay ) Certainly there are many cross section line drawings if not all too small.
Regards
 

Attachments

  • Victor 2 S4.jpg
    Victor 2 S4.jpg
    66.2 KB · Views: 1,133
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

Hi
I would to ask a question about Victor's bombload configuration. Normal load was 35 x 1000 lb bombs. Maximum, mentioned in many sources (also here in secretprojects forum) was 48 x 1000 lb. What was the exact configuration? AFAIK the 1000 lb bombs were loaded in "packs" or "clusters" each with 7 bombs. So 35 bombs = 5 packs of 7 bombs. But how about 48? Maybe it's mistake and it was 49 bombs (7 clusters of 7 bombs), not 48?
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

I am just trying to firm up my understanding of proposed Victor variants, so far this thread has proved very helpful! I do however have some gaps. We have seen the Phase 3 proposal which along with the Phase 2 ultimately produced the Victor B/SR/K.2 and we have the Phase 4 which was the supersonic Victor proposal. In addition we also have the Phase 6 (picture attached), which according to Andrew J. Brookes in V-force: the history of Britain's airborne Deterrent would have had wider centre sections, and a taller 12 wheel undercarriage to take a weight of 240,000lbs for a 14 hour endurance. The attached image also confirms what other sources say about a modified "gull" of the wings whilst the enlarged intakes suggest uprated Conways- (possible military versions of those used on the VC-10 variants which were proposed unto 24,000lbs in the Conway 42/7 variant? Or possibly even RB.178? some intermediate design?), it seems to me that such an aircraft would have had to have been a new build...? I assume the Phase 5 would have been the rebuilt B.2s mentioned in Vulcan's Hammer. So for me the outstanding questions are as follows:

Phase 4:
This appears to be the supersonic version.

Phase 6:
What engines was it to have used?
What exactly were the modifications that were to have been made to its wings, mid-section and undercarriage?
 

Attachments

  • P1100491.jpg
    P1100491.jpg
    47.9 KB · Views: 2,386
Last edited:
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

According to Tony Buttler BSP Jet Bombers since 1949, the Phase 4 Victor would have been powered
by four Conway 31 with reheat and was intended for high altitude use over the target.About the
Phase 6 Victor, I could only find, that it was a missile carrier.
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

This early Handley Page HP.80 design was the forerunner of the Victor:
 

Attachments

  • HP.80.jpg
    HP.80.jpg
    59.1 KB · Views: 2,217
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

That Handley Page was one weird looking craft:

random-51.jpg



Bob Clark
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

A snippet from Victor MkII Brochure

Personnel Transport

A special pressurized cocoon which seats thirty personnel is hoisted into the bomb bay; food and water sufficient for the journey are also carried. Any special equipment required by the personnel is stowed in underwing nacelles.

Regards,
Barry
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

Snippet from Victor B. Mk2 brochure
Troop Accommodation

Accommodation for up to 92 troops can be provided; 40 can be carried in a pannier fitted in the bomb bay. Whilst the remaining 52 are housed in two nacelles or “pods” attached in place of the drop tanks.
This accommodation is fully pressurized, sound proofed and air conditioned; toilet facilities are provided.
The wing nacelles and pannier are provided with escape facilities, those in the pannier mate with similar exits in the fuselage sides.
The loading of the pannier is similar to that of the camera crates.
The bomb doors are shut after the troops have embarked.
 
Re: Supersonic HP Victor

Snippet from Victor B Phase 4 brochure

The Victor Phase 4 development proposal results from a study of the supersonic capabilities of the Victor B. Mk 1and 2 aircraft.
Application of the area rule to the Victor shows that it closely approximates to the optimum shape for minimum compressibility drag in supersonic flight. The supersonic Victor is derived by the simple expedient of modifying the fuselage shape and employing engine reheat.
An intensive supersonic wind tunnel testing programme is proposed to check the aerodynamic assumptions underlying this study together with flight tests on Victor B Mk 1.
Supersonically the Phase 4 cruises at 65,000ft over the target, whilst subsonically it has a range/load/height performance comparable with that of the B. Mk.2 with a optimum cruising Mach number of 0.9 (515 Knots, T.A.S.).
The development utilises existing B. Mk.2. Wings and tail unit, with a redesigned (area rule) fuselage. The Rolls Royce Conway 31 engines are fitted with afterburners.
High energy fuels, when available, can be used relatively simply in the afterburners and increase still further the “supersonic spurt” ranges.

“Supersonic spurt” over target = Boron!
 

Attachments

  • Victor B Phase 4 3view.jpg
    Victor B Phase 4 3view.jpg
    172.4 KB · Views: 1,055
  • Vicotr B Phase 4 fuselage.jpg
    Vicotr B Phase 4 fuselage.jpg
    166.6 KB · Views: 991
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

Definitely would need more reheat on the supersonic variant to carry those wing pods...
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

From Le Fana 481.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    100.7 KB · Views: 770
  • 2.png
    2.png
    160.5 KB · Views: 797
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

The H.P.98 High Speed Target Marker seems to have been a standard H.P.80 but capable of greater acceleration and diving angles and using the H.P.80 overload fuel capacity plus the ability to carry 3,000gals extra fuel in the bomb bay. Some additional navaids were fitted and the H2S was upgraded for low and high-level use and To answer GTX's earlier query, there is no mention of defensive armament in the brochure.
Engine choices were: Sapphire 4, Conway or Olympus B.Ol.3. Speed 600kts max SL, 580kts 'economic' max speed, range depended on engine choice and varied from 3,000-3,900nm on normal fuel or 5,000-5,900nm using overload TO weight (weights vary with engine type).

The typical load seems to have been 4,000lb of target indicators or a normal bomb load with two Beacon bombs.
Attached is a bomb-bay loading diagram from the H.P.98 brochure for normal bombing and marking duties.
 

Attachments

  • HP.98 Bomb Bay Loads.png
    HP.98 Bomb Bay Loads.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 926
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

Nice find my dear Hood.
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

From the book; Handley Page Victor the Crescent-winged V-Bomber;

here is a HP.72A and early HP.80 concept for Specification B.35/46,which led to develop Victor.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    61.8 KB · Views: 793
  • 2.png
    2.png
    97.4 KB · Views: 749
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

I had heard of some of these proposals but never in this detail, thanks all.

Makes me wonder, in a what if sort of way, if these later Victors would still be in service, similar to the B-52 in USAF had the further evolved developments been deployed.
 
Victor and Red Neck

Some time ago there was a thread on Victor mods, and one of the posts had a picture of the Red Neck radar.

However, this contrasts very strongly with the description of Red neck given by Lovell, who states that it used a largely unmodified H2S Mk.IXA along with Green Satin to point it to the side. This would, presumably, remain in the existing radome and thus have no external antenna at all.

Anyone know for sure?
 
Re: Handley Page Victor projects

The sidescan H2S Mk 9 modification was introduced in three(?) Victors circa 1957-58. Red Neck was a quite different, podded system (twin underwing pods, one X-band, one Q-band) which never entered service.
 
Re: Victor and Red Neck

Maury Markowitz said:
Some time ago there was a thread on Victor mods, and one of the posts had a picture of the Red Neck radar.
Click to expand...

See Reply 17 of this thread.
 
Handley Page Proposal for the Victor K.2

Handley Page apparently undertook a study for the conversion of the Victor B.2 to K.2 standard that took a different approach to the one ultimately undertaken by Hawker Siddeley. The latter ultimately clipped the wings to reduce airframe stress and extend the aircrafts life whereas Handley Page had intended to make structural changes to extend the aircrafts fatigue life, HP also intended to install wingtip pods though I have never seen any information as to whether these would have housed the wing refuelling units or just additional fuel.

I have a recollection of seeing an image of the HP proposal in a book somewhere but I can't recall which one. Does anybody have any additional information?
 
Handley Page Victor Phase 5?

The Handley Page Victor Phase 4 was the prospective supersonic Victor, and the Phase 6 was the 4x Skybolt missile Victor, but what was the Phase 5????
 
I have never seen any references to the Victor Phase 5.

I have no doubt that there must have been one, it probably just hasn't been found yet or perhaps wasn't fully completed.

Both the Vulcan and Victor followed development in proposed Phases:
Victor: Phase 3 (new wing, 210,000lb AUW) April 55, Phase 4 (supersonic) Oct 1956, Phase 5 (?), Phase 6 (Skybolt carrier) Aug 1958
Victor: Phase 3 (new wing, 220,000lb AUW) Feb 1955, Phase 4 (? but possibly Type 732 supersonic proposals Aug 1956), Phase 5 (Avro W.107 carrier) Nov 1956, Phase 6 (Skybolt carrier) May 1960

The Phases do seem to be quite similar in aim and timing (though Victor Phase 6 starting in Aug 58 feels a little early given the Air Staff didn't really get on board with Skybolt until 59 and the deal wasn't done until early 60).

I would be tempted to speculate that the Victor Phase 5 would have been a stand-off missile carrier sometime during late 1956.
 
Younger readers may have been confused by the previous two posts.

These are French curves, a sort of arc tool for 2H pencils and/or Rotring pens.

Merry Christmas

Chris
 

Attachments

  • 631580_1000_1_800.jpg
    631580_1000_1_800.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 373
Thanks Hood.
The fully developed Victor Phase 6 was to carry 4 Skybolts and have wingtip tanks and new engines. As an interim HP had suggested a more minimal upgrade to the Victor B.2, carrying just 2 Skybolts and without the significant airframe mods, as an interim step-up. So potentially the 2 Skybolt Victor could have been the Phase 5??
 
CJGibson said:
Younger readers may have been confused by the previous two posts.

These are French curves, a sort of arc tool for 2H pencils and/or Rotring pens.

Merry Christmas

Chris
Click to expand...

I used to have a set of those but they went missing after a house move sometime ago.

As an aside, when I was sorting out the De Havilland DH101 scans Tony Buttler sent me, I was able to insert the images into my AutoCad drawing, which I then traced. While zooming in real close to the drawn lines to get them to match up, I could see that the draftsman had done the curved lines free-hand. I see his style very easily which helped with the matching up. I could see he never used a French Curve at all.
 
kitnut617 said:
I used to have a set of those but they went missing after a house move sometime ago.

As an aside, when I was sorting out the De Havilland DH101 scans Tony Buttler sent me, I was able to insert the images into my AutoCad drawing, which I then traced. While zooming in real close to the drawn lines to get them to match up, I could see that the draftsman had done the curved lines free-hand. I see his style very easily which helped with the matching up. I could see he never used a French Curve at all.
Click to expand...

There's always a temptation to go freehand as it can be surprisingly laborious to find the required curves. Parsing a complicated curve together (e.g. appearance of continued tangents over contiguous components) satisfactorily is especially hard and there may also be issues with reproducibility. Cad glosses over some of the thought processes that a designer might more readily entertain (deliberately, consciously) by doing exact drawings by hand, usually for the better. There was a period when I was pretty adept at telling cad drawn designs from hand drawn ones from the finished product alone; nowadays it's more of a moot distinction.
 
CJGibson said:
Younger readers may have been confused by the previous two posts.

These are French curves, a sort of arc tool for 2H pencils and/or Rotring pens.

Merry Christmas

Chris
Click to expand...
IIRC, at least one drafting equipment supplier in the USA managed to add a touch of humor to the term by carefully blending in a shapely shape familiar from certain shiny mudflap decorations on trucks.
 
CJGibson said:
Younger readers may have been confused by the previous two posts.

These are French curves, a sort of arc tool for 2H pencils and/or Rotring pens.

Merry Christmas

Chris
Click to expand...

Still got mine.
 
Me too. Tried flexicurves, but never felt right. I also have a Leroy lettering set.

http://www.forgottenartsupplies.com/?what=artifacts&image_id=355

Once I used these, I binned all the Rotring stencils I had. The 8th of August 1988 held no fear for me.

Now, where did I put my Curta?

Chris
 
Rapidograph - Single 'Ought' (Gray band) tip for inking. Sometimes on photostated line art (had to have a light touch - sometimes the pen tip would dig into the emulsion which was pretty soft.)

And 85 line screen 35% Zip-a-tone sheets (and AMS Scrub). (With a sharp X-Acto number 11 blade.)

And shipfitter's curves. Because flexicurves were a little weird - there was a little 'give' when you released it and it didn't quite hold the curve.

Oh - and waxing vellums to the layout/pasteup board.

Rubylith and Amberlith.

And those very special blue pens and markers.

(memoirs of a former ink-stained wretch)
 
aim9xray said:
Rapidograph - Single 'Ought' (Gray band) tip for inking. Sometimes on photostated line art (had to have a light touch - sometimes the pen tip would dig into the emulsion which was pretty soft.)

And 85 line screen 35% Zip-a-tone sheets (and AMS Scrub). (With a sharp X-Acto number 11 blade.)

And shipfitter's curves. Because flexicurves were a little weird - there was a little 'give' when you released it and it didn't quite hold the curve.

Oh - and waxing vellums to the layout/pasteup board.

Rubylith and Amberlith.

And those very special blue pens and markers.

(memoirs of a former ink-stained wretch)
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom