Holien Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhTbU3lO4hE Just seen this as I support the last Flying Vulcan in UK and not sure if it has been posted before. Really nice footage of the Vulcan flying. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Big bird! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) XH558 is no longer flying sadly, her FB page is here: https://en-gb.facebook.com/VulcantotheSkyTrust/ Wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Vulcan_XH558 Very glad that my nephew got to hear the full fury of her burners at an air display a couple of years back, he had his back to her as she made a low approach then lit 'em up and went vertical.....The look on his face was priceless, nearly jumped out of his skin! No recording can ever do justice to that sound! Edited March 1, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 The Vulcan was certainly the handsomest of the V-Bombers. It was good to see it in the air again, even for the last time. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted March 2, 2019 Share Posted March 2, 2019 Andy, Always thought the Vulcan was one of the prettiest jets ever and that the Victor looked like something from bad 50s SF. Thought the guy on the Tannoy in the fist video would never shut ut, but thankfully, he did, so got to hear the engines. The second video was wrenching to watch, akin, I imagine to when the last Space Shuttle was retired. Had no idea so many UK people were mad about this Vulcan! Loved the several teases before landing. Which air museum will receive her? Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 3, 2019 Share Posted March 3, 2019 Noticed the ad for AIRBUS on the undercarriage cover. Almost expected one for Starbucks or similar lol. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 (edited) Airbus were a big sponsor, running a Vulcan doesn't come cheap. On 3/2/2019 at 11:07 PM, John Kettler said: Thought the guy on the Tannoy in the fist video would never shut ut, but thankfully, he did, so got to hear the engines. I actually selected that video because of that, the Vulcan's surprisingly quiet right up until it isn't.....At which point it's mind-warpingly loud! But as I said, no recording can really capture it. Edited March 4, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 It's not only the microphone's limitation, but you'd have to have a large commercial sound system - like for a rock concert. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleksandr Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 Question: why it was its last flight? No more potential for modernization? It's looks like hell of a machine right there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 IIRC It was designed to deliver nukes and missiles are more effective today. Not sure what its payload was, but am assuming that it couldn't carry what a B-52 can in conventional munitions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 (edited) The Vulcan went out of service in 1981 replaced by the Tornado which also for the RAF has recently been withdrawn from service. A charity funded display Vulcan was kept flying till 2015 until technical support companies withdrew. Trust Chief Executive, Robert Pleming, answers the most commonly asked questions on the end of flying for XH558. Edited March 4, 2019 by Wicky 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleksandr Posted March 4, 2019 Share Posted March 4, 2019 What I've herd it could deliver nuke in a form of a bomb. If we are talking about reworking launching mechanism for adopting it to missiles - that is not a big of a challange for modern production. Moreover avionic can be also replaced. What I think (and thats the reason why I asked) is that modernization costs at times less than production of a new product. This was the last British made strategic bomber and I was wondering if it had any potential to get back into service. Its around 130 of them were made right? I bet that having at least 50 of those in your pocket will not hurt. Yea I guess it is already history - even if there was some potential those things are off for good. Somehow I feel sad about it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 Just as with consumer products there is huge pressure to persuade customers to buy new and discard the old rather than repair the old. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 On 3/4/2019 at 5:04 PM, Wicky said: The Vulcan went out of service in 1981 replaced by the Tornado which also for the RAF has recently been withdrawn from service. A charity funded display Vulcan was kept flying till 2015 until technical support companies withdrew. Trust Chief Executive, Robert Pleming, answers the most commonly asked questions on the end of flying for XH558. Erm … I'm sure one bombed Port Stanley in 1982. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 (edited) Found this: the British Royal Air Force’s Avro Vulcan bomber was due to be retired. However, the Falklands conflict gave the ageing nuclear bomber a stay of execution and pushed it into combat service. The Vulcan was not only used in anger for the first time in April 1982, but it also took part in what was the longest successful bombing run in history: a round flight of almost 13,000 kilometers, between Ascension Island and the Falklands (Blackman, 2014). Edited March 6, 2019 by MOS:96B2P 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 13 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said: Found this: the British Royal Air Force’s Avro Vulcan bomber was due to be retired. However, the Falklands conflict gave the ageing nuclear bomber a stay of execution and pushed it into combat service. The Vulcan was not only used in anger for the first time in April 1982, but it also took part in what was the longest successful bombing run in history: a round flight of almost 13,000 kilometers, between Ascension Island and the Falklands (Blackman, 2014). Correct - this is a book about the raid if you're interested: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/873380.Vulcan_607 The longest raid in history record has since been broken though, predictably by US B-52's: http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Documents/2016/December 2016/1216hours.pdf 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StieliAlpha Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 14 hours ago, Combatintman said: Erm … I'm sure one bombed Port Stanley in 1982. Yep, that was one strange opening to a strange war. IIRC, they scored two hits on the runway, which were filled a day later already. But the message was quite clear. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 4 hours ago, StieliAlpha said: IIRC, they scored two hits on the runway, which were filled a day later already. Yes, it was a good "message" (that presumably the UK could bomb mainland Argentina/Buenos Aires etc) but also demonstrated that using conventional munitions the aircraft may not have been effective. What are the comparable ranges and payloads of the Vulcan vs the B52? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StieliAlpha Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, Erwin said: Yes, it was a good "message" (that presumably the UK could bomb mainland Argentina/Buenos Aires etc) but also demonstrated that using conventional munitions the aircraft may not have been effective. What are the comparable ranges and payloads of the Vulcan vs the B52? I think the intended message was, that the Brits were going in for serious business. Backed up a few days later, with the sinking of the „General Belgrano“. Another „Falkland War“ speciality: The first (and to date last) major war ship sank after WW2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 7 hours ago, Erwin said: Yes, it was a good "message" (that presumably the UK could bomb mainland Argentina/Buenos Aires etc) but also demonstrated that using conventional munitions the aircraft may not have been effective. What are the comparable ranges and payloads of the Vulcan vs the B52? What is your justification for that statement? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 (edited) Some context for those unfamiliar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Black_Buck On 3/4/2019 at 12:27 PM, Erwin said: It's not only the microphone's limitation, but you'd have to have a large commercial sound system - like for a rock concert. Nope, not even that.....For that job you'd need an Avro Vulcan. Edited March 7, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 13 hours ago, StieliAlpha said: ...they scored two hits on the runway, which were filled a day later already. But the message was quite clear. "What is your justification for that statement?" So, more a morale booster like the Doolittle raid on Tokyo. But, since the Vulcan raid wasn't repeated (AFAIK) wasn't worth the logistical effort. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 6 hours ago, Erwin said: "What is your justification for that statement?" So, more a morale booster like the Doolittle raid on Tokyo. But, since the Vulcan raid wasn't repeated (AFAIK) wasn't worth the logistical effort. I meant the bit I highlighted … that using conventional munitions the aircraft may not have been effective. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 10 hours ago, Erwin said: "What is your justification for that statement?" So, more a morale booster like the Doolittle raid on Tokyo. But, since the Vulcan raid wasn't repeated (AFAIK) wasn't worth the logistical effort. There was Black Buck 1 – 7 During the 1982 Falklands War, Operations Black Buck 1 to Black Buck 7 were a series of seven extremely long-range ground attack missions by Royal Air Force Vulcan bombers of the RAF Waddington Wing https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/operation-black-buck/analysis/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, Combatintman said: I meant the bit I highlighted … that using conventional munitions the aircraft may not have been effective. "In addition to a "special" (i.e., atomic) bomb, the (Vulcan) aircraft was to be capable of alternatively carrying a conventional bomb load of 20,000 lb (9,100 kg)" and capable of carrying one 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) bomb to a target 1,500 nautical miles... the similar OR.230 required a "long range bomber" with a 2,000 nautical miles range." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Vulcan B52 payload is something like 70,000 lb with "typical combat range of more than 8,800 miles (14,080 km) without aerial refueling." And the US has the capability of sending several. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress The logistics to send a sufficient number of bombers to a distant target like the Falklands seems to have been beyond Brit capability at that time. IIRC the Falklands War was reportedly a "near run thing" that stretched the former Brit power to its limit. One bomber with conventional weapons isn't going to have that much effect - esp compared to the sub sinking of Belgrano. Edited March 8, 2019 by Erwin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.