It was better at low level flying to dodge SAMs.From what I can see, the Victor had a larger bomb bay and a slightly better range. Can anyone more knowledge confirm why the Vulcan carried on longer than the Victor in the bomber role?
It was better at low level flying to dodge SAMs.From what I can see, the Victor had a larger bomb bay and a slightly better range. Can anyone more knowledge confirm why the Vulcan carried on longer than the Victor in the bomber role?
Build some new as bombers/missile carriers and refurb/engine the older ones, some as tankers and ELINT?Okay, this may be seen as heresy by many, but how about axe the Vulcan in favour of more Victors, then have the Victor become the UK equivalent of the B52?
From what I can see, the Victor had a larger bomb bay and a slightly better range. Can anyone more knowledge confirm why the Vulcan carried on longer than the Victor in the bomber role?
Refurbished and re-engine the Victors so they can then get a stand off missile platform role in the 80s/90s using ALCM or anti shipping missiles (I think you could fit a fair few Sea Eagles on one) to keep it going in the cold war, then be the bomb truck for 2000s insurgencies.
The Vulcan just looked so damn cool, though...Build some new as bombers/missile carriers and refurb/engine the older ones, some as tankers and ELINT?
Problem is, you may as well use commercial aircraft for tankers/ELINT like everyone else does - probably better suited for the job with greater cargo/fuel capacity and more space for people/workstations. Personally, I thought the RAF should have used VC-10s more - standard length for the ASW (instead of Nimrod) and extended for tanker transport, ELINT, AEW etc.Build some new as bombers/missile carriers and refurb/engine the older ones, some as tankers and ELINT?
Scimitar can it be used exclusively as a ground attack machine ?I though the Shorts Sperrin was the low-risk option (straight wing, conservative construction methods).
How about the Supermarine Scimitar? A bit of an accident prone nail. Can’t see how you’d squeeze it out to ‘79 in the face of Phantoms and Buccaneers. Even at it’s peak it was eminently forgettable.
Now, the Buccaneer has a fair few options. How about a few more exports, or perhaps he Buccaneer 2* gets built with all the TSR2 and P.1154 computers and sensors, maybe even the supersonic variants?
The Victor looked more elegant though. The crescent wing was a very clever solution to transonic speeds. It also looks like it's breaking the sound barrier even when its in the hanger.The Vulcan just looked so damn cool, though...
Perhaps if they were practically given away. There were plenty of other 50s/60s aircraft built in greater numbers (only 76 built, and half of these crashed) that would be easier to keep in the air for a further decade. With only 30 odd left, even scavenging airframes would be a challenge to reach ‘79.Scimitar can it be used exclusively as a ground attack machine ?
Can't agree from an aesthetic viewpoint. The Victor looked advanced, sure . But the Vulcan looked like "The Martian Airforce."The Victor looked more elegant though. The crescent wing was a very clever solution to transonic speeds.
Given away maybe to a private airforce? although maintenance would be a nightmarePerhaps if they were practically given away. There were plenty of other 50s/60s aircraft built in greater numbers (only 76 built, and half of these crashed) that would be easier to keep in the air for a further decade. With only 30 odd left, even scavenging airframes would be a challenge to reach ‘79.
TrueI don’t think there were any PMCs with the money to run an Air Force in the late 60s/early 70s (a fun ASB idea…) and the demand would be quite niche.
The B-58 looks amazing, and I love not only its looks but the performance it offered. Extending its life would depend on finding something for it to do that makes use of that performance, and doesn't need any internal space (its weapon load - and a lot of fuel - was all in the under-body pod, IIRC). That limits your options. Escort jammer for strike fighters? Terminal guidance for volleys of high-speed cruise missiles? Conversion to long-range interceptor with a pod full of AIM-2s and a powerful radar?Has anyone got any ideas on extending the life of this beauty????
Even now it looks the 'dogs bollocks' 👍 👍 👍 👍 😍
Introducing the Convair B-58.
The least unlikely option would seem something like a long range SEAD/ EW platform to " Open the door" for the strategic bombers to come through. Though F111 variants kinda ended up doing that much cheaper. Problem with the B58 is a combo of its really high operating costs and evolving tech making " High and Fast" sort of obsolete versus the " Low" altitude approach and stand off missiles making it cheaper to say use cheaper B52s to deliver nukes at much longer ranges then dropping gravity bombs.The B-58 looks amazing, and I love not only its looks but the performance it offered. Extending its life would depend on finding something for it to do that makes use of that performance, and doesn't need any internal space (its weapon load - and a lot of fuel - was all in the under-body pod, IIRC). That limits your options. Escort jammer for strike fighters? Terminal guidance for volleys of high-speed cruise missiles? Conversion to long-range interceptor with a pod full of AIM-2s and a powerful radar?
Sell it to Australia and Iran as a conventional bomber ?Has anyone got any ideas on extending the life of this beauty????
Even now it looks the 'dogs bollocks' 👍 👍 👍 👍 😍
Introducing the Convair B-58.
Sell it to Australia and Iran as a conventional bomber ?
Has anyone got any ideas on extending the life of this beauty????
What about strategic recon as the money would be very good?The least unlikely option would seem something like a long range SEAD/ EW platform to " Open the door" for the strategic bombers to come through.
I don't recall the story exactly, but I understand there were rumors the B-58 was evaluated by the RAAF. I don't know if the plane ever left US soil or was ever painted with the kangaroo roundels even.