Riain
Banned
Was the Shackleton wing the reason why the Argosy fleet saw only 5 years service? The Shackleton fleet saw more service than that, as did Argosys with 70 sqn and radio calibration Argosys with 104 sqn.
Vickers VC-7 in RAF service
Was the Shackleton wing the reason why the Argosy fleet saw only 5 years service? The Shackleton fleet saw more service than that, as did Argosys with 70 sqn and radio calibration Argosys with 104 sqn.
Could we perhaps dispense with the Valiant altogether? They only flew and entered service in 1951 and 1955 respectively, both of which were a year ahead of the Avro Vulcan's dates. Considering that the RAF had managed without it from 1952 when the UK first tested a nuclear weapon and didn't carry out their first live air drop test until late 1956 I'm just wondering whether the extra year would be insurmountable or not. The Valiant was always the back-up, well the advanced back-up if you also count the Short Sperrin, in case the Vulcan and Victor didn't work out, if the development of the Vulcan is looking good could they perhaps finish the Valiant at a lower priority just in case but not put it into production whilst pushing more resources into finishing the VC7 and speeding up the Vulcan? It would mean a more homogeneous V-force and without converted Valiants that the government would have to go for VC7-based tankers.
The Shackleton wing was used to save money & development time but at the cost of added weight and drag. The aircraft was also range limited, underpowered & unable to carry a full load any distance. Also by the early seventies the withdrawal from east of Suez was all but complete and the best thing since sliced bread was in service, i.e. the Hercules. Therefore with no real need or role (beyond radio calibration) & the financial state of the country the Argosy got the chop.
Riain
Banned
The wing jigs were used and the wing adapted for use but still with old style construction techiques. The Argosy was about 30% heavier so accrued fatigue at a fast rate, so it appears that it had to go when it went.
Riain
Banned
So given the Argosy fleet is buggered by 1970 I think the best plan would be to build 40 or so Belfasts and a similar number of Transalls, which equates to OTLs 10 Belfasts and 66 C130Ks. Then when the Mason review occurs the RAF can get rid of the Britannias and Comets and maybe cut Belfast/Transall numbers by a bit.
No it was because of the unexpected and then accelerated East of Suez pull out. That was also why the Andover C Mk 1 was quickly cut from 3 to one squadrons too. According to the Formation of the Armed Forces table in the Annual Abstract of Statistics the RAF had 30 transport squadrons on 1st April 1966 (it doesn't go back any earlier) which had reduced to 18 by 1st April 1974. However, the RAF squadrons 1950-1990 spreadsheet that I complied using a different source says there were only 28 transport squadrons in the RAF on 31st March 1966. Both sources include transport helicopters as well as fixed-wing aircraft.
After the Argossy was withdrawn as a transport aircraft some were converted to calibration aircraft. However, they were replaced by Andovers in 1977. The Andovers were probably from the last Andover transport squadron, which was disbanded as a result of the 1974 Defence Review. There was also a plan to convert another 14 (IIRC) redundant Argossys into multi-engine trainers. I don't know if they would have been instead of or as well as the 26 Jetstreams, but that plan had died by the time of the Mason Defence Review (or was killed by it) anyway.
Riain
Banned
It does not make sense that in an environment where squadrons are being withdrawn from East of Suez and disbanded that 6 squadrons of perfectly good, almost new Argosys are replaced by Hercules at the cost of tens or even hundreds of millions of pounds.
The handful of 70sqn Argosys that survived until 1975 were used in the VIP role and the 9 E1 calibrations conversions that survived until 1978 would have been combed out low-hour airframes used at less than maximum weights.
Archibald
Banned
Transall and Argosy probably have very similar performance, somewhat 80% of a Hercules. Which one is best for the RAF, I don't really know. Probably the Argosy, but not the one with the Shack wing. Looks like the former flew in 1959, the later in 1964. For the record, the Transall flew in 1963. The agreement between France and Germany dated from 1957, Transall company was created in 1959. The aircraft entered service in 1967. Italy left early to develop the G.222.
Maybe the Transall would have been a better bargain than the Argosy for the RAF. A Transall and Belfast fleet.
According to Wikipedia, Transall lost to C-130 for RAF procurement in the 60's.
Maybe the Transall would have been a better bargain than the Argosy for the RAF. A Transall and Belfast fleet.
According to Wikipedia, Transall lost to C-130 for RAF procurement in the 60's.
The famous alloy, DTD683, which grounded the Valiant fleet, was also present in a fair number of other a/c. The Shackleton and Argosy were among them, as well as Victor Mk.1&2, Hastings, Canberra and Viscount. Only the Valiant did not undergo extensive replacement programs. Even the Lockheed Hercules used it in prototype versions, but replaced it. It's possible the V-1000 used it.
The plan to use Argosies as multi-engine trainers died due to a combination of defence cuts & the intention to go to an all jet training course.
Last edited:
It might not make sense, but that's why it happened.
I don't know the exact date, but the decision to withdraw from East of Suez by 1975 was made sometime in 1967. Then in January 1968 the withdrawal date was put forward to the end of 1971.
It was too late to cancel the Hercules purchase. They were already being delivered. The first C-130K few on 19th October 1966. The first aircraft arrived in the United Kingdom in December 1966. The Hercules entered service with No. 242 O.C.U. in April 1967 and the first operational unit (No. 36 Squadron) received its first aircraft on 1st August 1967.
I agree with the bit about defence cuts, but I'm sceptical about the all jet training course. The RAF still needed multi-engine trainers for the propeller powered transport aircraft.
E.g. the Putnams entry on the Scottish Aviation Jetstream says that the 26 aircraft purchased said that they were replacements for the Varsity in the multi-engine training role. It also says that the entire force was put into storage when the 1974 Defence Review vastly reduced the requirement for multi-engine turboprop pilots with the RAF's transport fleet. It wasn't until 8 were brought out of storage and returned to service with No. 3 Flying Training School. An initial 14 of the remaining 18 were transferred to the FAA in 1978 to replace the Sea Prince in the "flying classroom" and communications roles.
Riain
Banned
If the Herc was ordered in 1965, before the EoS withdrawal decision, then that would be right.
This was a terrible time for the British forces, the government mandated defence scenario from 1959 was EoS limited wars with minimum mandated strengths such as an aircraft carrier ready to go. The Labour government did a review in about 1965, after coming to power promising to buy cheaper American aircraft, started cancelling things like the TSR2 and CVA01 based on their justification as EoS platforms and then announced the withdrawal. They would have been better to announce the withdrawal in 1965 and then cacel platforms based on their NATO utility.
As for the January 1968 decision to accelerate the withdrawal, it was made at a particularly bad time of Australia; we had no sitting Prime Minister due to Holts disappearance and McMahon not being elected yet and while we were balls-deep in the Tet Offensive with the entire 1ATF in action within and outside of out TAOR Phouc Tuy province.
See if they'd be willing to switch the money over to buying Vulcans? If the British come to the Americans saying that they've got a better bomber available I can't really see them refusing. Your point about the 'free' tankers is well made though.
Riain
Banned
I might be wrong but I think the MUDAP program ended in 1955 or something like that, so no money was available in 1956 or after for this sort of thing.
The late 1940s to the late 1950s was the era of the "Year of Maximum Danger." That is the British Government and armed forces were expecting World War III to break out in 1957 and made their plans accordingly. That included concentrating the money and design resources that were available on developing the best equipment that could be in service for the late 1950s.
Therefore cancelling the Valiant isn't a realistic option because the RAF and British Government wanted as many V-bombers as possible as soon as possible because they wanted as big a nuclear deterrent as possible as soon as possible. The Valiant was ordered in the first place because it would be ready before the Victor and Vulcan despite not meeting the specification.
Even if the Victor and Vulcan could be put into service sooner it's likely that more of them would be ordered from Vickers instead of the Valiant to speed up deliveries. Bear in mind that in the 1950s Avro, Handley Page and Shorts were building Canberras as well as English Electric to speed up Canberra deliveries. Hunters were built by Armstrong Whitworth as well as Hawker. Swifts were ordered from Supermarine and Shorts, although in that case the 146 Swifts ordered from Shorts were cancelled.
Therefore cancelling the Valiant isn't a realistic option because the RAF and British Government wanted as many V-bombers as possible as soon as possible because they wanted as big a nuclear deterrent as possible as soon as possible. The Valiant was ordered in the first place because it would be ready before the Victor and Vulcan despite not meeting the specification.
Even if the Victor and Vulcan could be put into service sooner it's likely that more of them would be ordered from Vickers instead of the Valiant to speed up deliveries. Bear in mind that in the 1950s Avro, Handley Page and Shorts were building Canberras as well as English Electric to speed up Canberra deliveries. Hunters were built by Armstrong Whitworth as well as Hawker. Swifts were ordered from Supermarine and Shorts, although in that case the 146 Swifts ordered from Shorts were cancelled.
Last edited: