I remember from my childhood days the Vulcan bomber from the Air Shows at RAF Wildenrath in Germany. To this day it is the most beautiful jet aircraft I have ever seen. Thank goodness it never had to fire a shot in anger (with the exception of the Falklands War.)
JUST Remembered The Lighting Fighter Aircraft a 1950s Invention from Her MAJESTY'S United Kingdom 🇬🇧 that was twice the speed of sound and was able to climb above 100 thousand feet. No Fighter Aircraft Could Match that in its era.
My dear old dad, now in his late eighties, was an RAF policeman guarding the Thor site at Polebrook. He records two 'interesting' little snippets. His armament consisted of a .38 revolver, with which he was expected to deal with unauthorised miscreants. The ammunition for this heavy artillery, just six rounds per man, was wrapped in sticky tape in his belt pouch to prevent over enthusiastic use of Her Majesty's property.......didn't do much for a rapid draw though! The only time this ammo was permitted to be loaded was during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The missiles operated on a 'dual key' principle apparently. Which meant that a resident USAF officer had to jointly authorise a launch with his RAF counterpart - this was because the warhead was owned by the Americans. A few days after Polebrook became operational with Thors the senior engineering officer quietly informed the CO, 'Don't worry, sir. If we need them to, they'll go!) Dad insists this is not an apocryphal story. I kind of hope he's right.
Everyone, no matter how low in rank, or manual in responsibility, wearing a tie, just in case they have to attend a board meeting, or go to their club for cognac and cigars….
For a while, 1950s to about 1964, (I think!) technicians had their rank denoted by inverted chevrons US style to distinguish them from other ground trades. The experiment didn't last long!
good remarks ;))) But Vulcan was really great. And what was decidedly better? :) Early B-52 was not state-of-art anyway. Our Tu-16s was about the same level as Vulcan or below
Yes he did say supersonic bombers which we were developing at that point with the TSR 2. Wing Commander Roland Beamont who was in an English Electric lightning (which itself was no slouch) made the comment that as a chase plane for the TSR 2 he was left for dead by the TSR 2 on reheat on just one engine.
This is probabaly the only record in the public domain of the 'Thor' Intermediate Range Ballastic Missile (IRBM) system in one of the six locations in Eastern England all aimed at Russia the the Warsaw Pact countries of Eastern Europe. Back in the days before ICBMs could be developed and launched from USA soil. Prime Minister Harold Mac millan painted a huge nuclear 'Bullseye' on this country when he agreed to base US IRBMs there in the late 1950s. The Thor Missile system was also based at Incherlik in Turkey. It is the primary reason why the Russians retaliated by basing their IRBMS on the Island of Cuba. The 1962 crisis was only averted not because, as we were told, the Russians 'blinked' first when confronted with a blockadge of US Warships. It was because Kennedy agreed that the price of removing the Russian missiles from Cuba, was that the Americans would remove their missiles from the UK and Turkey. This was achieved within 2 months of the end of the crisis. This apect of the Cold War in General and the Cuban Missile Crisis in particular has been all but airbrushed out of history.
By 1960 thete were serious doubts as to the effectiveness of the V bombers. As to missiles not being effective in the observable future, they replaced the bombers in 1967. Polaris.
Absolutely. The US fighters at the time had highly stressed wing loadings and could only turn slowly but missile advances quickly overcame the problem. I wasn't criticising the V bombers, just pointing out how quickly they became obsolete in their primary role. Technology was moving at an alarming pace in the forties, fifties and slowed down a bit after then as equipment became so complex.
The Vulcan Bomber nuked America twice in one of the largest exercises to test America’s air defences. The Vulcan bomber at the time was absolutely unrivalled due to its speed, manoeuvrability and high altitude capability.
@@BuddySpike101 "and high altitude capability" if we discuss 1962 then Vulcan will be downed with 99% probability at once enters Soviet (not Russian as you like write) anti-air missile zone. Alas - I like this iconic plane very much
what you mean "with that Capability"? In sense of speed or bombload or equipment US or Soviet bombers were about the same or even better. Sure you know about B-52 but perhaps forget Tu-16s and/or 3Ms (you called it Bison)
