First of the V’s - The Vickers Valiant
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Somewhat eclipsed by it's later siblings, the Victor and Vulcan, the Vickers Valiant was not only the first of the "V-Bombers" it also arguably achieved more than them in an admittedly short service life.
Book on Subject: amzn.to/3bT0uqb
Sources for this video can be found at the relevant article on:
militarymatter...
If you like this content please consider supporting me at Patreon:
/ ednash
Want another way to help support this channel? Maybe consider buying my book on my time fighting ISIS:
amzn.to/3preYyO
Great video. My father was an AEO on the one that broke. They were flying with an instructor, and heard a loud bang. Assumed it was the instructor, some sort of test. But all the colour had drained from his face! They looked along the fuselage with a periscope but could see nothing. Went home and circled the airfield, asking air traffic control to have a look through binoculars. Nothing was apparent, so they attempted to land. The aircraft began to roll when the flaps were deployed, but they recovered from that and then decided to do a flapless landing - a first for a Valiant, but it was fine. Ground crew met them and began to inspect the aircraft. One of them noticed a tear between the wing and fuselage, and called the aircrew over to have a look. He shone a torch into the gap where they could see the broken spar. The wing had been held on by its skin, and that had started to tear...
Flaps aren't really necessary for landing but it's tough on the brakes and tires!
Seriously though; flaps usually are to enable a steeper approach with a higher power setting than to actually lower speed or increase lift.
It's nice to see a positive article on the Valiant, I was an Electrical Technician on the Valiant from early in February 1955 until August 1956 at Gaydon which was an Operational Conversion Unit, Derek Tolley
Jesus how old are you
Hi,I was at Gaydon at the same time,on 138 Squadron 0:50
He'd be at least 88-90 years old now!@@somebloke2238
There was also the "backup backup" bomber option - The Short Sperrin!. 4 heavy bomber types under simultaneous development - at the same time as the Canberra, and a flock of fighters. Back when the UK had an aircraft industry!
Very true, it could have been the original 'V' Bomber 👍
There's a pic on here somewhere of all four in a static park, presumably Farnborough in the 1950s. The Sperrin with its stacked engines and lack of significant sweep looks like a piston job, in which the piston engines have been replaced by jets. It wolud have been interesting to see how much it could be developed and upgraded if it had ever reached service. .
Having so many aircraft in production in what were small numbers in international terms with each costing as much as a single national type to research and develop is why there is no longer a UK aero industry,it simply wasn't cost effective
@@davidmcintyre8145Totally Correct. I often wonder what the outcome would have been had the main manufacturers pooled their resources to save costs during the fifties. We may have ended up with fewer but better, more cost effective designs.
@@user-lt9py2pu6u That was partially what the forced amalgamation of the various firms was about but unfortunately it was not pushed through with sufficient vigour or explanation so was fought by the companies and happened a few years too late
I've always been amazed at the "absolutes" that affected military aircraft design... Things like, "We don't need guns, missiles are all that will ever be used," and "We don't need to worry about low-altitude penetration, everything from now on will be done at high altitude."
Except aircraft developers actual don't say those things. Every aircraft is a compromise, with its attributes chosen for what looks to be the best compromise for the needs expected when it goes into service. Nobody says always or forever about such choices, they are making their best guess about the near future.
Your mistaking publication for application again.
There is an ever changing meta to combat due to evolving tactics and new technologies.
There's only so much funding to go around, and if you get, well you had better justify it I guess.
Same things that’s being said about tank :P
It's fun to look back at the retro-modern look of the Valiant. It also definitely looks British.
It looks like something out of a '50s sci fi movie.
@@minuteman4199 The fore section of the Victor certainly looks like a 1930s - 40s sci-fi rocket.
To me looks like a b47 mixed with a convair tradewind , as far as range and payload goes i always thought this british triumvirat was rather iffy, considering money was tight after the war they were adequate
@@cnfuzz The Victor could cruise at transsonic speeds at 55,000 ft in 1958 and you think thats iffy ? Oh boy ! As for range...where do you think they were likely to be going in the Cold War ? Range was fine for the task.
There's something really beautiful about the stylings of the day when things like the V bombers were designed. It's a shame we can't have things that look that good these days
Great video - my dad was involved in their introduction to squadron service, and in some ways my favourite V-Bomber. Just one point - the Healey government ? You mean the Wilson government, of which Denis Healey was minister of Defence 😉
Ah! Yes, sorry! The eyebrows always grab my attention.
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters
Animal off the Muppet show was the love child of Dennis Healey & a floor mop... 🙃
@@GARDENER42 🤣👌👍
My grandad was in the raf in the 60's, from what he told me before he died he was mostly a ground fitter on PR canberras, he would fit and remove the cameras, and develop the films. The valiant was always his favourite of the v bombers,and i always envied that he actually saw them flying in service.
I live about 20 miles from XD818, the sole surviving airframe, and go visit regularly. The things that stay in my head about it mainly are the jettisonable dome the crew were supposed to escape out of, without hitting the tail somehow.
The other thing being just how huge the external wing tanks are, something like 463 gallons each!
The "Empire Ken" ship at 8:26 was the old SS Ubena of German Africa Line, also the last ship to get out of Danzig in WW2 safely. 30 Children were born aboard who were all given the second name Ubena by the Captain
Loved the RAF V bomber fleet. They held the line during the Cold War.
Vulcans made regular appearances at the Canadian National Exhibition airshow in Toronto when I was a kid in the late '70s and early 80s.
Not really, as balistic missiles turned the bomber fleet obsolete.
@Aqua Fyre True -- but you can kill a giant shark by shooting a scuba tank in its open mouth -- think about it. Because Jaws.
@@minuteman4199 Vulcans made regular visits to Goose Bay in Canada for training flights.
Of the 3, I loved look of the Victor.
That Victor still looks like a space ship.
As soon as I saw mention of this Valiant vid I thought "metal fatigue". I've never realised it was due to the plane being redeployed to an out of spec mission. Just assumed bad design maybe due to being an early jet and so little experience of the engineering needed. And of course that mark 2 shows greater Vickers forethought than the air ministry/RAF.
Another excellent video.
The metal fatigue was caused by a disastrous experimental alloy - not bad deployment.
What is also worth mentioning is the civilian/transport deratives of the V-bombers planned. Air Specification C.132D let to 3 offers: Hanley Page first offered the HP.97 which was later replaced with a more advanced HP.111; very similar in many respects to the Victor. Avro took their Vulcan and produced from that design the Avro Atlantic (Type 722). Vickers initially came with their VC5 which was rejected; but then proved to be the winner with their improved design: a combined military transport offer (the V-1000) with a civilian VC7. It got the contract, but when 80% of the prototype was already ready everything was cancelled...."We have handed to the Americans, without a struggle, the entire world market for big jet airliners" was what George Edwards, Vickers managing director, said....
Not as elegant and captivating as the Vulcan. Nowhere near as menacing and otherworldly compared the Victor.
But it was first and did everything asked of it. Not to mention, coming in on time and under budget, which is unheard of nowadays. There's a lot to be proud of in the Valiant.
What a beautiful aircarft the Valiant is...
NOT! Compared to the Victor and Vulcan that thing looks like Madeline Albright.
this is a criminality under appreciated channel.
The progress of aviation post war is simply astonishing!
Fun fact: the Villiers Vindicator bomber in the James Bond novel “Thunderball” is based on the Valiant.
Suffice to say it was the Vulcan used in the movie version.
This video was worth the watch!
Those were the days- when three very different bomber types could be developed and enter service almost simultaneously.
There were actually four bomber prototypes built, the 2 advanced ones (Vulcan and Victor) and 2 less advanced ones (Valiant and Shorts Sperrin). The two advanced ones had small scale research aircraft built to test the design (Avro 707 and HP88), while the Valiant and Sperrin were built full size off the bat. The Sperrin looked like a big Canberra with two engines in each wing nacelle, two prototypes were built, but it went no further and the aircraft were used as engine test beds before being retired in the late 1950's
@@richardvernon317 Thanks for that info- I must admit I had completely forgotten about the Sperrin. I guess four bomber types was one too many even then...
Yes, unimaginable nowadays. However, at the time, as Ed mentioned, there was an urgent need to get squadrons with next generation bombers into service very quickly. Also, a lot of aircraft design and production capability still available post WW2 within various British aircraft companies. Hedging your bets with one company might have resulted in an inferior design with delays and increased cost. Not to mention a lot of pressure from the other companies not selected. So, it probably made strategic, tactical and political sense at the time?
@@richardvernon317 Thanks for mentioning the Sperrin.
I'd forgotten about it.
Just like during WWII really. The gov' - at least for a time - decided a triad of Jet Bombers would be most likely to produce a winner, while also providing the visible strategic deterrent of a nuclear hammer blow against the USSR.
A very graceful aircraft, very sleek.
Hi Ed. I love all the armchair critics ! I enjoyed it Ed , short , sharp and concise . That picture of the Valiant was taken by Charles E Brown the most reknowned aerial photographer of the period . It's so evocative and menacing !! Thanks Ed.
Oh the V-bombers!
It remains one of the few areas of aviation history in which I'm interested but not very familiar.
Why did the UK select three designs to go into service? What were the pros and cons of each design, and what were the considerations that lead to the selection of each?
Looking forward to this one! (commented before viewing).
Hope I answered some of your questions :)
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters
You did Nedash, bloody top content as usual!
So now that Blighty has stopped nuking Australia and its territories, I feel like it's high time you started making reparations and did a video on the Avon Sabre.
It really seems like the right thing to do...
;-)
@@tigerpjm LOL one day.
I did read that the Egyptian airforce looked to using their new MiG-15s against the Valiant but as there was over three thousand feet between the service ceiling of the Mig and that of the Valiant this was never going to happen.
Glad ive got something great to watch when i can't sleep, thanks Ed!
Fascinating video! Thanks. 👍🙏
One has to ask how the Americans manage to continue with their B52 fleet. This was built around the same time as our V-bombers
Excellent!
The late model Lincoln was capable of reaching 45,000ft (with a full bomb load).
The problem was that it was unpressurised and therefore a pain to operate for the number of hours required to reach targets in Russia.
The cockpit pressurisation was the major improvement between the Lincoln and B-29 Washington.
Lincoln’s dropped the first nuclear bomb test articles at Maralinga from 45,000 ft and this was used to calibrate the bomb sights for the V-force.
These Lincoln’s were fitted with turboprop engines…
The aircraft you’re referring to were the three Lincoln’s modified with two Armstrong Siddeley Python turboprops in place of the outboard Merlin engines, these aircraft were originally only designed to be used as engine test beds and not for service use.
@@mrjockt There were six of them (three were built in Australia)…
@@allangibson2408 RF403, RE339, SX972, RF530, SX973 and RA643 are listed as the 6 known Lincoln engine test beds used in the development of the Python, Bristol Proteus, Bristol Theseus, Napier Naiad, Rolls Royce Tyne turboprops and the Rolls Royce Avon turbojet, the first three were the ones involved in the casing drop-tests for the Blue Danube nuclear weapon program, all were built for the RAF by Avro in the U.K.
The maximum release height for the ballistic casing tests from the Python powered Lincolns was 34,783 ft as per the files at the National Archives. Only two of the four Merlins were replaced with Python turboprops. No way a Lincoln is carrying its max bomb load (14,000lb) up to 45,000 ft.
Nice use of gdp - Cancel 1 v bomber or half the trains
I felt as though I grew up with the Valiant as I lived as a boy during the fifties within cycling distance of Wisley, where the Valiants were taken for testing after being built at Brooklands. I was told that the runway at Brooklands was too short for them to land back there, though I have never had confirmation of that.
👍 Another excellent video which I enjoyed, thank you. Saw your comment about perhaps making a video on the Short Sperrin - yes please! In terms of post WW2 British jet bombers, while the Valiant gets less attention than the Vulcan and Victor, the Sperrin is often not even mentioned.
A sleek, fairly attractive aircraft, but it can't touch the Vulcan for beauty...
My Dad a pilot with 138 Squadron & based at RAF Wittering,& retired just before they grounded them..
This & the Canberra were his favourite jet’s
I love the Valiant for obviously reasons & only having one left in my opinion is a crime!!
this is a amazing aircraft inn my opinion
Great video! Two things to mention. First, I really like the V bombers. Every time i think of retro-futurism as an aesthetic choice, i am thinking of the Victor. Second, I remember watching somewhere, that the first British thermonuclear device test did not actually fail (fizzle as you said), but was just the biggest nuclear bomb they can make. The plan was to fake a thermonuclear device.
G'day,
The first British attempt to nuke Australia did NOT "fizzle", it exploded over Montebello Island, off Western Australia. In about 1953.
The LAST British effort at nuking us in Oz was a Warhead Fratricide Test, conducted by buggaring up the sequence of the detonation of the wedges of Conventional Explosives surrounding the Plutonium Core - to simulate EMP effects of a nearby Warhead from a different missile or Re-Entry Vehicle going off and scrambling a Bomb's Firing Circuits....
The Plutonium Fizzle Yield Test occurred at Maralinga, South Oz, in 1963 ; upwind of moi at the time, and thus I haven't tasted propper Fallout on my breakfast Porridge since I was a 2 year-old.
The RAFie-Chappies put their Warhead atop a Tower, and succeeded in blowing almost fissioned Plutonium Dust all over the place, for tens or hundreds of miles, some of which lightly dusted the East Coast.
The "Cleanup" was then duly half-arsed, bungled, whitewashed with paperwork, covered up, lied about by all Governments concerned, investigated, re-done, botched again, re-whitewashed..., and there are still Aborigines slowly dying an blinded by the botched British Imperial Plutonium Fizzle-Yield Test nearly 60 years ago.
Just(ifiably ?) sayin'.
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
@Aqua Fyre
Thanks.
The prevailing Winds blow from West to East, and Maralinga is West-Southwest of Glen Innes.
We ALL got dusted.
And when (Lilli)Putin nukes Pine Gap we'll be in the Fallout Cigar, again.
Such is life.
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
@Aqua Fyre
Good Oh !
Or as they used to say,
" Rue, Britannia,
Marmalade and Jam.
Five Chinee Crackers
Upyore Arsehole ;
Bang bang
BangBang
BANG !"
(ie, Prosperity,
For Britons in
Britain...; relies on
Gunpowder invented in China.
So,
OBEY..., or die from the
Overkill...)
I wasn't trying to deny that Adelaide was under the larger Cloud..., I was stating that the smaller Cloud which tracked between Sydney and Brisbane went straight over Glen Innes.
And then, for 20 years, until they went and attempted to scrape up the contaminated Soil..., then every time a Bubble of Hot Air lifted off from Maralinga to transition from a Willy-Willy into a Thermal, growing to top-out as a Cloud, drifting East to be forced up by the Western Slopes of the Great Divide ; the Radioactive Plutonium Dust was sprinkled onto wherever the Clouds passed over - particularly if those Clouds rained.
And I've been living here since 1882, when my father's grandfather brought the family DNA to the district.
So, the taste of Plutonium on my Porridge in 1963 is merely a part of the Family's Oral History.
About like the time a Japanese Floatplane, launched from a Submarine, flew over the town in 1943, twice, on it's Reconaissance flight covering Yamba, Grafton, Glen Innes, Inverell, Moree, Inverell, Glen Innes, Lismore, and back to the Submarine. Absolutely uncontested, as there was no Radar, no Anti-Aircraft Guns, and the only modern Fighter Aircraft in the RAAF was one unarmed Mk-1 Hawker Hurricane based in Melbourne - used for Aerobatic Displays over Recruiting Rallies, and the USAAC had some P-40s but they were in Darwin.
So, the actual response to the 1943 Floatplane Overflight..., was that the Lions Club dug Slit Trenches at the Primary School, and my father also dug one in the back yard.
And, in 1972 when Nixon was thunkin' about nuking the Ho Chi-Minh Trail (in his frustration arising from Ho Chi-Minh's work at ethnically-cleansing the Moon of all AmeriKans...!) ; there was a Civil Defence meeting at the Town Hall where we were told how nothing in Glen Innes was worth the cost of Atom Bombing us, and that because of the Iodised Table Salt sold here by Health Department Regulations (Iodine defficient Soil...) all our Thyroids were already full of "clean" Iodine so when any Fallout from Counter-Force bombing of Pine Gap, or Counter-Value bombing of Brisbane or Sydney got here, then we would not need any Iodine Tablets...
The only time I actually bugged-out to avoid getting Nuked was in 1983, when a US Warship was in Sydney while KAL-007 was shot down for perving on Kamchatka...; and my girlfriend and I got out of the Sydney Basin (went to Bowral for 4 days) to avoid being under any Fireball over the Harbour.
The joker in the pack right now though, is that whereas NATO and ANZUS never ever built any large Public Blast/Fallout Shelters for Civilians - the USSR built big Public Shelters in all their Cities. And 5 years ago Russia began cleaning out, repainting, repairing, restocking, and preparing their Soviet-Era Shelters for occupation, and use, at 10 minutes notice.
So, my gut feeling is that EVERYTHING which Russia is doing in Eukraineistan lately is intended to provoke NATO into firing as much as a single Gunshot at any Russian.
Because, I think, guesstimate, and suspect..., that (Lilli)Putin has calculated that his population will emerge from their Shelters in better condition to be grateful to him, after whatever NATO might manage by way of a Retaliatory Response - than NATO's (and ANZUS's) populations might find ourselves following a sudden massive ("Defensive") Pre-Emptive Counter-Force First Strike, by "surPRISE !".
And, anytime that anybody wants to compete with Unkle Spam at Cloudy Mushroom Skyscape-installations, then Pine Gap will attract at least 3 Waaauugh(!)heads, to be sure, t' be sure, and t' be certain..., of blinding CINCPAC and the Pentagon from Capetown to Vladivostok, arcing up over the Muddled East, Absurdistan and Chynna...
So, how's YOUR Fallout Shelter looking, in these benighted dayze ?
I live on an Endangered Species Sanctuary, but I haven't engineered anything to preserve myself from Fallout....
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
Thanks Ed....Shoe🇺🇸
That image at 11:17 is awesome! What a looker!
Thanks for linking this with your other video about the Vickers Windsor. Great videos to watch together!
I had a love affair with all three V bombers since a teenager in the middle 60's. I built all three Frog 1/96 scale model kits. Valiant was my favourite. It's such a handsome aircraft with that organic look. Then in the 80's I first built the Matchbox Victor then the Airfix Vulcan . Then in 2006 built the Mach 2 Valiant which have today on display in my living room. Good news is one Valiant still exists. Thanks.
Actually, the Lincoln wasn't the most advanced bomber on the RAF inventory prior to the V Bombers. The RAF had obtained 87 USAF B-29s, which the RAF dubbed "Washingtons" as a stop gap. Also, let's not forget the British English Electric Canberra - an aircraft so totally excellent that it was adopted by the USAF and produced under license as the Martin made B-57 - two of which still fly with NASA.
The V-bombers were ordered late 1940s, the Washingtons came into service in the 1950s.
Interesting how Vickers always managed to get things done more quickly and efficiently than other British companies in its heyday.
Good Video. Lots of Info. One small error. Healey never headed a British government. During the de-commissioning of the Valiant, he was Harold Wilson's defence minister
It's these defence ministers which need serious beatings.
The victor is one of the coolest looking aircraft In my opinion
I heard that in the U.K. they had a Handly Page Victor, as a RAF Station Gate Guardian, and it got scrapped this year because no one wanted it ?
At RAF Marham in Norfolk the last Victor tanker base. Yup, nobody wanted it. The cost of moving it and finding a location to keep it was prohibitive.
Great video as always! .. XD818 is a beautiful aircraft and I highly recommend a visit to Cosford to see her ... For me its a place where I can feel close to my grandpa ...
You missed one crucial detail, Ed: the Valiant's wing spars had used an experimental alloy which became unstable with age - meaning the entire fleet would have needed re-winging.
So - the designers' fault, not Denis Healey's.
On time and on a budget! A "Rarity"! That's awesome!
at 2:53 note the DH.89 in the background.
It was a nice looking aircraft with tougher competition. The Victor was the best looking of the three to me.
@EdNashsMilitaryMatters >>> 👍👍
The RAF, even as the V-bombers were introduced, calculated that by 1960, they would be vulnerable to SAMs and obsolescent. Hence low-level being examined with Valiant and Victor low-level designs being considered before it was considered simpler to use the Vulcan. So I'm unconvinced that the Valiant B.2 was cancelled because low-level intruders were considered to not required. Indeed, if you look at the ORs for types to meet post-1960 mission profiles they emphasise a low-level approach with a pop up to deliver Blue Steel.
The other ekement specified in the mid-50s was a low-level, supersomic strike aircraft with a tactical nuclear load designed to take out SAMs, radar, airbases. That was to become the TSR-2 but after many delays its projected in-service date was the year the V-bomber force was to be finally stood down (1970) due to the agreement to buy Polaris.
It was kind of crazy for a cash strapped UK to build 3 different nuclear jet bombers. Even stranger that they ended up with 3 different great aircraft.
This was part of the reason they were so strapped for cash, vast fortunes spent on armaments programs while the defeated axis powers were focusing on modernising their industry.
There's an excellant book, whose title escapes me, that covered the history of the Canberra as well as the V force bombers.
I loved the shape but preferred the Victor in the 70s my dad drove up the gt north Rd to show me their bases
Bearing in mind that the fatigue problems, caused by material problems, were unforeseen by Vickers, wouldn't the B2 also have been affected?
Watch the vid again. The fatigue problems were caused by a high-altitude airframe being used for low-altitude work. Vickers had actually foreseen this, with the Mk2 being re-designed with a much stronger airframe specifically for this purpose.
(Unless I'm reading your question wrong, in which case feel free to tell me to watch it again, as I'll be happy to do so.)
@@unclenogbad1509 There were also problems with the alloys used that made it worse than it should have been on the Valiant B1. The Valiant B2, whatever its merits, was too late when you had Vulcan and Victor in advanced production stage. Don't forget, the RAF were busy crashing nearly 900 Gloster Meteors in this period. It was costly in every way imaginable.
@@timhancock6626 I never claim to be an expert, but still think the modified B2 would have fared much better - although that remains a complete 'what if', and you're right about it coming in too late.
Not sure what your point is about the meteors, but again, you're right with the figures, 450 of which had fatalities.
Great work - very interesting.
No mention of the Short Sperrin, the backup design...
It will get it's own video.
With a ceiling of over 50,000 ,the Mig-15 would have had a very difficult time intercepting it
Valiant looks like giant hawker hunter.
Very true. The Hunter, Valiant, Meteor, Javelin, Canberra, and Vampire all had that beautiful moulded look that was a signature of 1940/50 British first gen jets 🙂
Minor correction- Christmas Island is in the Indian Ocean, not Pacific. I love your videos, always fascinating.
If you build a plane with unbelievable performance and specs they will have to have it … but a modest airframe that can be introduced now … no one will believe you can make it.. I’m kind a surprised the Canberra even got produced
Looks like a giant hawker hunter!
Valiant job these videos
The Valiant was able to carry the B-43? When did it get certified for this mission? And, the B-43 entered U.S. nuclear stockpile in 1961 and went out around 1989. It was a megaton t-nuke.
At least half of the nukes deployed with the V-force between 1958 and 1964 were American and almost all of the operational H-bombs were based on US Designs (Yellow Sun Mk 2 was basically a B-28 physics package in a British casing with a lot of Ballast). The Valiants could carry the Blue Danube (20KT), after which in 1961, they carried 2 x B-28 weapons supplied by the US, which were replaced by the B-43 in 1963. They got the B-43 because it could be deployed in the Low Level laydown attack profile.
A bit of a Short Stirling of the V bombers overlooked.The Valiant looks like a big Canberra.
There was a competitor to the Valiant called the Sperrin. It did look like a Big Canberra and was built by Shorts!!!
And yet, and yet, the Tu-95/Tu-142 & of course the B52 still fly on to this day . . . . - I mean, the Skywarrior lasted longer as a combat aircraft (although of course the Victor saw service as a tanker in 1990-1991).
Makes me wonder whether or not as a stand-off missile carrier we should have tried to adapt yet more Comet to Nimrod standard, given them one or another weapon-system to do that and had, in effect, an MRA type.
Still, its amazing the UK ever got these going - but its also why the UK was spending something like 15% of GDP on defence in 1951. Unsustainable really - and ironically Valiant's used over Suez caused in part the downfall of the UK East of Suez eventually.
Healey Government? Don’t you mean Wilson Government? Healey was the defence secretary.
Differnent rôles depending on the bomb-bay's contents?
Thunderbird 2!!
In my mind, the Valiant was by far the smartest of the V's. This was the only one that could have been reworked into a civil airliner. The others were just too bonkers. However, war seems to be more fun for certain circles.
It was the Wilson government not the Healy government. Healy was "defense" secretary in that government - the worst ever.
Having reviewed a few comments, it's seems that militaries are often doomed by one of two lines of thought; either, 'what we have, now, is perfect, and will never need to be upgraded,' or, 'everything we have, now, is shit, and we'll never need it again'; an abject lack of forward thinking, in either case. How long did it take world powers to stop training on the last war? How long did it take for military trainers to give up linear absolutist thinking? Too long. Now, I do understand that thinking 'outside the box' is often expensive and non-military leadership hates this, not even seeing the point, often, but History has proven, time and again, that naive wishing for peace is the surest possible way to encourage an aggressor.
Vickers Valiant the plane - much better than Vickers Valiant the tank. :-D
Continuing the part of British industries worst enemy being our inept, incompetent and corrupt governments. Two rules that should have been enforced for politicians, 1 A person's desire to become a politician should bar them from ever becoming one, 2 politicians should have no say over military matters especially equipment.
Very much the first of an interesting series of 'what-if" bombers :) The B.Mk.2 was found during testing to be much harder to track and intercept due it's low level approach. The Victor was very much an 'almost' supersonic bomber (even if only for 'dash' purposes) which could have been a British first. And the Vulcan ended up having a lot of 'proto-stealth' properties that fitted with advanced ECM equipment would have been awesome. (Being the only foreign bomber to bomb the US twice before joint exercises stopped for some reason :) )
Always thought the Valiant was a rather attractive aircraft. Couple of points (small but, hey...). Near the beginning you show a picture of the Supermarine Swift concept to illustrate the UK's jet bomber concept - the Swift was (a very unsuccessful) fighter - not a bomber. You also state the Valiant featured a "compound wing": this was fitted to the Victor. Although, at first glance a compound sweep design, The Valliant's wing was only very mildly swept (as you can tell from the images), which was one of the reasons it was viewed as a more conservative design than the other two V-Bombers.
Don't recall the B2 variant; the carrots, the stretch, & the paint made her a truly menacing beauty.
British defense procurement & sustainment ever inspire me 2 thots of kinetic retributions upon those responsible, of the most varied & abberrant forms, unto the 'sorry I survived' type 👁️.
You need to read the 1957 Defence White Paper. They intended doing away with all manned aircraft and cancelled about nine aircraft projects. The English Electric Lightning just scraped through as it was already just in production. That was The Conservatives who seem to be very good at chopping up and cancelling aircraft. Labour or Conservative, most cancellations have proved with hindsight to be reasonable decisions, however painful they seemed at the time, and they did seem painful.
Hi Ed!
My favourite V-bomber. M.
11:10 >>
the Brit Gov. at the time was on "a cutting spree", sure : hence the mini-skirts.
Any chance you could cover the Maltese air war?
"We NEED a JET bomber and we NEED it NOW'
Good vid, but Healy was not PM, that was Wilson.
Video.
Pretty sure there are a couple of nose sections at Bruntingthorpe leics
I think in the end, the Air Ministry should have just picked one plane, the Avro Vulcan, and stayed with that model. The Vulcan proved to be an excellent plane at all altitudes, especially once they started building the Vulcan B.2 with its larger wings.
Had the RAF opted for just the one bomber at the time the chances are it would have been the Victor, although the Victor B.1 was about 15mph slower than the Vulcan B.1 it could fly higher, had almost double the range and could carry a much larger bomb load.
Victor was aerodynamically more sophisticated.
@@mrjockt Unfortunately, the Victor was just too optimized for the high-altitude role, and was quickly converted to tanker service because the plane was not well-suited for low-level flying like the Vulcan was, in my opinion.
@@Sacto1654 When the decision about which aircraft design to put into service was made high altitude bombing was the preferred method of attack, so, at the time, if the RAF had decided to stick to just one aircraft design the Victor would have made more sense than the Vulcan, it wasn’t until a few years after all three aircraft had entered service that the switch to low altitude was made.
@@mrjockt Bollock, the Victor was faster. A B mk 1 prototype actually went Supersonic in a dive. No Vulcan eve broke Mach 1.
Weren't V-bombers used during the Malaya Emergency?
Healy government???
Wait, did I change universe again? I hate it when that happens! President Thatcher has a lot to answer for with that bloody temporal bomb of his.
As much as I love the Vulcan (who doesnt?), the Valiant B2 would have been even better!
British Obsession with wing root mounted engines...
What about the Vulture, anothe V`s plane.
I'm surprised you didn't mention, even in passing, the Short Sperrin.
Thatll get it's own video.
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters A bizarre fact of the Short Sperrin is that, technically, there were no prototypes, just two production aircraft. What an utter waste of production jigs. I look forward, as always, to your videos! They're great.
BTW, are you part American? You said schedule as 'skedule', the American way
Haha my wife is american, I've picked up bad habits. :)
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters as an interesting change, why not do a video about Israeli adaptations of US aircraft, like rearview mirrors on Phantoms. Apparently within a fortnight of receiving them the mirrors had been added. I believe that the Americans then designed and installed them too
@@peterkaye8162 Interesting idea! Thanks!
What was the tanker replaced with
was it the kc130
In response the soviet union planed it's trio of the, little known, Vladimir, Volodja and Vitalij Bombers.
Actually it was the Vodka, the Vodka and the Vodka!
@@bob_the_bomb4508 😂 Njet! That was the special fuel! And incidentaly one of the reasons the programm was canceled. It was considered alcohol abuse by many.
Ah! The Brits and their wing root engines.
Yep a Royal Aircraft establishment fetish, along with T-tails and HTP Rocket Motors!!!
The Soviet Tupolev TU 16 "Badger" also had wing root engines
Her hum..like the Meteor and Canberra...oh hang on....
@@timhancock6626 Meteor was designed like a normal twin engine aircraft of the time (1942). Canberra started out in 1944 as a single engine aircraft with a big engine in the fuselage. The next design of it had twin engines in the wing roots, however seeing it wasn't known which engine design was actually going into the thing, Petter decided it would be easier to put the engines in the wing nacelles instead of the wing root.
Thanks Ed. I've always kind of looked down on the Valiant as the klutzy ugly sister of the 'proper' Vee bombers.
Going to have to reappraise that view.
V-bombers.
What about the Stirling? M.
Stirling wasn't as good as Lanc and Halifax. They stopped using it as a bomber in December 1943 and mostly used it as a glider tug after that, so obsolete by the time the war ended.
after towing gliders for D-Day operations, 160 were converted to transports for the remainder of the war, the rest were scrapped.
Thank you. I know, I would just like there to be a video about it.
11:10 I wish there had been a Healey government! Beachmaster at Anzio. Sorry cheap shot
ah, the "black bombers"! And yet no one talks about the Short Sperrin (the "second" backup plan to the Vs!)
On my list ;)
@@EdNashsMilitaryMatters A big Canberra!!!
The B.Mk.2 was a near perfect design
At least it isn't the Valiant tank, amirite?