Conversion To Canberras 

I noticed the lack of ear muffs...probably shot without a jet...the engines are noisy as I found out at Salmsbury, Preston, UK.

My uncle few Canberra in Vietnam and he was at Amberley air base . His is Jack Boast.

@Didddin duuu nufffin Wakanda enn shiiieet 'Too', not 'to'. You're welcome.

@@johnnyboy2k 'too', not 'Too'. You're welcome.

Walter Heath The Australian Canberras each flew 8 sorties a day, 7 days a week, with two crews on two 12 hour shifts. Despite limited time to conduct maintenance the aircraft had a 97% serviceability record, which is extraordinary. They would fly into the target as low as 800 feet at 350 knots release 1,000lb bombs then climb to get out of the fragmentation envelope, but many aircraft were damaged by shrapnel, and some aircrew were wounded by fragments from their own bombs. No. 2 Squadron “Magpies” were part of the 35th Tactical Fighter Wing flying out of Phan Rang air base. Because aiming was all low level visual they had an accuracy of within 20 meters. Flying 5% of Wing sorties, they were responsible for 16% of total bomb damage. They dropped more than 76,000 bombs between 1967 and 1971 over Vietnam. The Magpies deserve to be remembered for their remarkable contribution.

I've noticed that city on maps in Australia. I also read many of your comments, 'good on ya' for spreading good, accurate, detailed information about this great aircraft. Btw, although the F-111 may have had it's issues in the 'Nam, it's still a very interesting aircraft. I believe it was the first to have 'ter-con' radar controlled, terrain following radar, allowing that jet to fly between 400-600 feet agl, and at a pretty fast pace. I'm not an expert or historiographer, just seen a lot of documentaries. They still have 3 WB-57 Canberra flying high altitude research for NASA. least they were 10-20 years ago. I'm getting older, so..🤷‍♂️ not privy to all facts. The Canberra that did reconnaissance and high altitude flights was a very different aircraft, indeed. Two separate versions were produced, the NASA variant had an enormous wing. It wasn't as strong as the regular Canberra, which though a bomber, could maneuver more like a fighter in some respects. It did fly well over 50k feet (i believe it's capable of 70k, but ya better look that up.) It took excellent photographs at altitude, and the cameras were probably as large as some large bombs actually. I believe it took recon photos for US during the Cuban missile crisis, along with the U2 dragon lady. Be well, thank you for sharing your information. ☀️😎☀️🇺🇸

D. Cypher The Canberra was designed for high altitude (bomb from where no one can shoot you down ) but suffered from 2 problems - cloud cover restricting vision at crucial times (especially important in Vietnam) and poor accuracy. As you point out, at high altitude it was better for reconnaissance. The Australians did something different. They developed their Canberras and training for low level bombing. This proved especially valuable in Vietnam because the American airforce had no low level bomber before the F1-11, and that aircraft performed poorly when first introduced and withdrawn from theater. However, after modifications and changes to training the F1-11 was brought back to Vietnam at the end of the war and the second time it performed superbly. But until then the Aussie Canberras were the only option for low level bombing that was sufficiently accurate to use as close troop support. Their accuracy was better than 20 meters which meant they could be safely called in relatively close to friendly ground forces and take out Viet Cong dug-in gun emplacements. The most remarkable thing about those Aussie aircraft was that they flew 24/7 with two crews on 12 hour shifts and they had a 97% service reliability with around 8 sorties a day. Truly heroic flight crews At least one made it back to base with half a wing missing. Their biggest danger, however was fragmentation from their own bombs because they were so low. When the Aussies took delivery of the F1-11 they already had flight crews experienced in low level bombing and did not suffer the same problems the Americans did with their aircraft. It is very interesting to learn that Nasa made radical changes to their Canberra’s for high altitude work. It is a testament to a good airframe design that both the Americans and Aussies could make changes to adapt to new roles, and that old bird would just keep on giving. Sadly the Australian Air Force buried all of its F1-11’s when they were retired, due to the large amount of asbestos used in their construction, but there are at least 4 Canberras in 4 different museums in Australia including one of the rare trainer versions. It is remarkable that after all these years they are still flying. I just copied this from a museum website: “The Canberra served in Vietnam with 2 Sqn RAAF under US Air Force 35th Tactical Fighter Wing Command. Interestingly, the Canberra could carry 6 x 1,000lb British bombs internally in its bomb bay, but in Vietnam the only bombs available were US designed, and only 4 x 750lb US bombs would fit in the bomb bay - the drop tanks were removed and an additional 2 x 750lb US bombs could be carried (1 on each wing tip). The bomb aimer would push the normal bomb release buttons for the 4 bombs internally but had to push the “Drop Tank Release Switch” to drop the bombs on the wing tips. US Commanders in Vietnam regarded the Canberra as obsolete yet the RAAF 2 Sqn Canberras achieved ~16% of the total bomb damage recorded by the 35th Wing but only flew 6% of the total bomber sorties. In reality, the RAAF Canberras were some of the most effective strike aircraft in South Vietnam. A twist of fate which had them equipped with a “bombardier” station meant that they were one of the few types that could do “level” bombing. This was extremely valuable when cloud layers prevented the standard dive run that was normal for more “advanced” types such as the F-100 and F-4.” I also just learned something I never knew before. After introducing the F1-11, the RAAF also made modification to Canberras for high altitude reconnaissance. The “standard” service ceiling was 48,000 ft (which, at the time of initial design in the 1940’s was considered very high altitude. The modifications the RAAF made gave them a service ceiling of 55,000ft.

D. Cypher Here is a treat for you, a ground attack/fighter you have likely never heard of - the CAC Boomerang. It was an Australian designed aircraft that is remarkable for going from Proposal to first flight in 4 months. It also had a unique howl. The Stuka had to use a siren to do this, but the Boomerang makes the sound naturally. They became known as Smokey Joes because they were used in New Guinea to lead Corsairs in, marking Japanese targets with smoke bombs. This one is flying at the Temora Aviation Museum (they also have an air-worthy Canberra) ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--9-luVivamY.html

@@artistjoh hey, that's awesome! I indeed haven't heard of this aircraft. Thank you very much! Although I have heard the word boomerang as an aircraft, i had no idea, what they were talking about. Additionally, that natural howling is awesome. *kudos* ☀️😎☀️🇺🇸

@@artistjoh well, the F111 aardvark certainly had it's early teething problems, yet went on to be the platform almost every swing wing aircraft was based on. We had a lot of technological problems to overcome to introduce that firsts: first variable geometry wing aircraft, the first turbo fan engine, and low level terrain following radar, at high speeds. If anyone takes a look at the panavia tornado, GR1-GR4, and Tu22 Tu22M2, Su17,20,24, B1B, Tu160, Tu160M2. ALL, can trace their variable geometry wing to the F111 aardvark. The RAAF was flying the F111C until i believe about 2009-2010. Pretty amazing. The Canberra was unbelievably versatile in my opinion, largely based (also in my opinion) on it's outstanding wing design. And yes, you're absolutely correct about the reconnaissance version, i believe due to it's enormous wing, was more of a powered glider. It took some of the most important reconnaissance photographs in history. Thanks for the information exchange. It's always a pleasure,and refreshing to communicate with a higher intellect. Take care. ☀️😎☀️🇺🇸 peace, and much respect from USA.

Thanks for the info!

D. Cypher if I recall correctly, the US manufactured many more Canberras than the U.K. Or Australian built ones.

@@rolfehartley that's not a fact I knew... i thank you for sharing that! Be well, be safe in these strange times. ☀️😎☀️🇺🇸

The B 5 7 - a stalwart of the Vietnam air war. No us types could supply the flexibility of the Canberra.

It is one of the few British planes the USA bought it is good to see you had good taste.

granskare The American variant like British one was designed for high altitude bombing and the amount of cloud cover in Vietnam limited their effectiveness. The Australians, on the other hand, developed their Canberra’s for low level bombing below the clouds. This filled a role that American aircraft weren’t so suited to and the initial deployment of F1-11’s in 1968 resulted in too high a loss rate and so they were withdrawn until 1972. The Australian Canberras flew 8 sorties a day with two crews on two 12 hour shifts. Despite limited time to conduct maintenance the aircraft had a 97% serviceability record, which is extraordinary. They would fly into the target as low as 800 feet at 350 knots release 1,000lb bombs then climb to get out of the fragmentation envelope, but many aircraft were damaged by shrapnel, and some aircrew were wounded by fragments from their own bombs. No. 2 Squadron “Magpies” were part of the 35th Tactical Fighter Wing flying out of Phan Rang air base. Because aiming was all low level visual they had an accuracy of within 20 meters. Flying 5% of Wing sorties, they were responsible for 16% of total bomb damage. They dropped more than 76,000 bombs between 1967 and 1971 over Vietnam. The Magpies deserve to be remembered for their remarkable contribution. The last Australian Vietnam MIA was a no. 2 Squadron Canberra crew who disappeared after a night bombing mission near Da Nang in 1970. Their aircraft and remains were found in 2009 in jungle near the Laotian border.

@@neillaidlaw7116 The Canberra and the Harrier although in both cases the Yanks didn't trust us to build them and they built their own version lol, I think the US Marines still have the good sense to fly the Harrier to this day, although it's been heavily developed from our version.

Amazing what you can find on RU-vid. Glad you found it and enjoyed it. Thanks for your feedback.

@H HOUR HOTEL I agree. Perhaps I should've spelt it "aeroplane". That's how Aussies spell it, isn't it?

@@jasoncarpp7742 yep

National Vietnam Veterans Museum in Newhaven (Phillip Island) Victoria has one being restored also. Will not be flown but if the chief restorer has anything to say about it then it will only be a piece of paper away from being airworthy. Big project! Does the Temora one get flown often, do you know?

still in common use today

Yes Keens brand mustard.

Len, there was heating for the cabin. I flew as a nav on the Mk 20 Canberra. After along time at high altitude the heating was unable to keep the cabin warm. Since the pilot was sitting in the sun he was unlikely to turnthe heat up high enough for the nav to get much warm air. At low level there was inadequate cooling.

@@johnbushell9636 Thank you for the extra info.

More on this. Fascinating.

Flying communications node....operational til just last year I believe...flown over very remote parts of the globe to assist with ground comms

Very cool! Who flew it?! That would be a great conversation.

Yes, but that's not fair to the many Canberras used in Sinai, Indo-Pakistan wars, Falklands, etc. @Brett Bass

No ear muffs, bombs and big noisy engines are why I use hearing aids now. I am just typical of many, I would suggest. Ear muffs were not around in those days.

This film was made for the RAAF. Under their direction as far as subject content went.

It’s still incorrect "….

Ray, on the OCU the initial flights were on the Mk 21 trainer, but later flights on the Mk 20 bomber. You could not drop bombs from the trainer so it was essential to fly both types on the conversion. I had a look in the log book where I see that the first seven flights were Mk 21. After that some Mk 20 flying and some Mk 21.