V-FORCE Questions

Fascinating stuff.
To add to Walrus’ memories, I did two tours of RAFG as a service policeman. After dispatching the Jaguars and Tornadoes on their one-way trips, we would,apparently, escort what dependants were left to the UK bound ferries and THEN return to what was left of our bases to assist with absentees and deserters-a euphimism for firing squads – cheerful stuff eh?

Fascinating stuff.
To add to Walrus’ memories, I did two tours of RAFG as a service policeman. After dispatching the Jaguars and Tornadoes on their one-way trips, we would,apparently, escort what dependants were left to the UK bound ferries and THEN return to what was left of our bases to assist with absentees and deserters-a euphimism for firing squads – cheerful stuff eh?

Just to let you know that I have had probably the most pleasant 15 mins on the forum ever reading this thread. Thanks Les B and exmpa for such an eye opening account of potential operations in the event of the Cold War turning hot.

I’m too young to have experienced the tensions of the Cuban missile crisis, or to be able to appreciate fully the tensions in the 70’s and 80’s, but if it sends a chill down my back thinking of it now, I can imagine how much worse for those who would have to perform the duty of executing a nuclear attack.

The most chilling part is the thought of perhaps having nothing to return to….

Thank you guys, it’s been entertaining and informative 🙂

Sorry to drag an old thread out of the cupboard but it’s a thread well worth looking at again and I have a small ditty that touches on what WL747 said back then.

Having been in RAFG (as groundcrew I hasten to add) on a MOB in the late 80’s I well remember 4-day exercises which used to simulate the opening gambit as it was seen at the time.

The last afternoon of the exercises stick in my mind – the tannoy system was well utilised and we used to hear standard pre-written messages throughout the 4 days: the one that always, always, always (and even now whenever I think about it) used to make my testes climb up into my body went along the lines of “All remaining aircraft scramble for survival” 🙁

By this time (if it were for real) the main attacks had gone in utilising all serviceable aircraft and any remaining aircraft that were good to fly but not necessarily serviceable enough to carry out an assault were started up and launched in some sort of save the aircraft and pilots type scenario.

That particular tannoy coupled with numerous aircraft starting up across the base was simply the most chilling thing I have ever encountered because it meant that in minutes few the incoming Red Block nukes would blow us all to hell and back 🙁

Just to let you know that I have had probably the most pleasant 15 mins on the forum ever reading this thread. Thanks Les B and exmpa for such an eye opening account of potential operations in the event of the Cold War turning hot.

I’m too young to have experienced the tensions of the Cuban missile crisis, or to be able to appreciate fully the tensions in the 70’s and 80’s, but if it sends a chill down my back thinking of it now, I can imagine how much worse for those who would have to perform the duty of executing a nuclear attack.

The most chilling part is the thought of perhaps having nothing to return to….

Thank you guys, it’s been entertaining and informative 🙂

Sorry to drag an old thread out of the cupboard but it’s a thread well worth looking at again and I have a small ditty that touches on what WL747 said back then.

Having been in RAFG (as groundcrew I hasten to add) on a MOB in the late 80’s I well remember 4-day exercises which used to simulate the opening gambit as it was seen at the time.

The last afternoon of the exercises stick in my mind – the tannoy system was well utilised and we used to hear standard pre-written messages throughout the 4 days: the one that always, always, always (and even now whenever I think about it) used to make my testes climb up into my body went along the lines of “All remaining aircraft scramble for survival” 🙁

By this time (if it were for real) the main attacks had gone in utilising all serviceable aircraft and any remaining aircraft that were good to fly but not necessarily serviceable enough to carry out an assault were started up and launched in some sort of save the aircraft and pilots type scenario.

That particular tannoy coupled with numerous aircraft starting up across the base was simply the most chilling thing I have ever encountered because it meant that in minutes few the incoming Red Block nukes would blow us all to hell and back 🙁

I’d like to second whats been said about this thread being really fascinating (along with the other V-Force thread open). Though nuclear warfare terrifies me up to this day and has been the source of many a nightmare, the weapons, people and operating organisations responsible for such things, SAC, V-Force, SSBNs etc fascinate me.
I’m just curious, when talk of recovery following strikes is mentioned, were there any plans for crews to ditch their bombers by naval vessels in the ocean (assuming any such vessels survived), with the crews being picked up and their aircraft consigned to Davy Jones locker? Given what was mentioned about more distant targets making recovery difficult.

Also, and this is open to everyone, not just the RAF veterans, how do you think the introduction of Skybolt and TSR2 might have affected things? Would the RAF for instance have finally standardised on a single V-bomber ie the phase 3 Vulcan which would have carried up to 6 Skybolts or the phase 6 Victor which could have carried 4 and in both cases stayed on patrol for many hours. Or would the mixed force of Victors and Vulcans persisted and could the goal of 84 Skybolts being in the air at all times ready to strike was feasable given how few strategic missiles we seem to maintain on submarine patrols today (16)?

re. efiste2’s starter: Chapters XVIII, Dispersal Techniques, and XX, the QRA Era, of Wynn’s Deterrent History, has much on this. UK’s reliance on Barbarossa maps, confined West of the Volga, was one reason for the 24/7/57 UK/US MoU on nuke supply (Project “E”) and target co-ordination (Wynn, Ch.XVI,P.262: SAC/RAF “inextricably linked”). RAF could find Counter-Value targets, but not Counter-Force. Low-level ops were not possible before GD TFR was fitted, 1964/65, by when US satellite data was available.

Prof.P.Hennessy’s work, inc. 0197264220, Cabinets and the Bomb (original Papers), 2007, has RAF with up to 104 targets in the 1/7/58-23/5/1963 period (in SIOP from 1/10/61), “doubled-up” US/UK (hence “making the rubble bounce”) (some trebled by the dozen or so Mirage IV which might penetrate). Healey’s Memoirs have by end-64 just the Moscow criterion, which is why Chevaline had to be done, to penetrate the target intended to be covered by an ABM.

As an anecdotal extra – my understanding is that much of the detailed mapping required to plan the routes into Russia was actually extracted from detailed Maps the Germans made during WWII.

They provided the topographical data required for the proposed low level flight plans – which were described as hedge hopping in one famous newspaper article by Chapman Pincher – after he’d been taken on a demonstration flight to prove the V-Force had low level capability.

I think my parents still have that clipping from the paper!

Mr Creosote

I am told that this recovery plan was not always in place in later years as targets became more distant.

I really am not qualified comment on that because what I wrote is what I was told, not something I had to confront personally. Maybe someone from the later years will come along and be able to answer your question.

exmpa

. We were then planned to recover to an allied airfield. I am told that this recovery plan was not always in place in later years as targets became more distant.
exmpa

Hope you don’t mind my asking, but how did you feel about that?

What is the consensus on the switch from an airborne deterrent to using SLBMs?
It is the more effective option, or does using a bomber force give more flexibility?

It was definatly the right thing to do. British air bases were vulnerable to to Soviet IRBM’s with short flight times. At Sea SSBN’s were not especially with NATO naval supremacy.

Please add my thanks to those above. These accounts are far better than anything else for understanding exactly what went on and why. Could read them all day if I didn’t have to go to work in a minute!

Yes Spyflight is pretty good
As far as it goes that is……;) exmpa

I’ll second that.

The bloke that runs Spyflight is a nice fellow, (we’ve e-mailed), but some of the ‘facts’ he has there are just not on. Not his fault I guess but it shows what taking other blokes printed ‘stories’ can do. Especially that bloke Lashmar! Trouble is Lashmar’s not wrong, he’s just not right! But then, who really cares? Not me. :rolleyes:

What is the consensus on the switch from an airborne deterrent to using SLBMs?
It is the more effective option, or does using a bomber force give more flexibility?

There is also this link which may be of interest.
http://www.spyflight.co.uk/51sqn.htm

Yes Spyflight is pretty good

As far as it goes that is……;)

exmpa

This thread is a tribute to all thats good in this forum.
I just wish I owned a publishing company to commission books by the two major contributors. Thank you gentlemen, sincerely.
There is also this link which may be of interest.
http://www.spyflight.co.uk/51sqn.htm
Hope it helps
Be lucky
David

And if this sort of interesting information is not recorded, it will be lost one day in the future!

Bill O’Sullivan [the Cockpit-Fest organiser] at the Newark Air Museum has been partially doing this by recording the Log Book details from ex-Vulcan aircrew that flew XM594, which is displayed at the museum. This exercise was started during their “Tribute to the V-Force” event several years ago.

I believe that the Bedford [Thurleigh] 30 day dispersal mentioned earlier in the thread may even have been by a crew with XM594.

There was some talk via the museum Dispersal newsletter that Newark’s new proposed hangar project could have a Cold War aspect to it relating to both the Vulcan and Shackleton airframes. The Shackleton already has two books published, ‘Duty Carried Out’ and ‘Dedication to Duty’, which include details of sub hunting ops / patrols and FALLEX missions from the early 1960s.

http://www.newarkairmuseum.org/shop.htm

And if this sort of interesting information is not recorded, it will be lost one day in the future!

Thank you

Just to let you know that I have had probably the most pleasant 15 mins on the forum ever reading this thread. Thanks Les B and exmpa for such an eye opening account of potential operations in the event of the Cold War turning hot.

I’m too young to have experienced the tensions of the Cuban missile crisis, or to be able to appreciate fully the tensions in the 70’s and 80’s, but if it sends a chill down my back thinking of it now, I can imagine how much worse for those who would have to perform the duty of executing a nuclear attack.

The most chilling part is the thought of perhaps having nothing to return to….

Thank you guys, it’s been entertaining and informative 🙂

Have to add my thanks too. this is invaluable info from the actual people who were there and stood ready to do the job, better than many books in my view…………….thanks again

Thanks everyone, this thread is a shining example of the best this forum has to offer.

Thanks guys for being up the sharp end, but thank God you never had to do it for real!

Eric