Victor tanker wingspan

Reply to thread

Roger thankyou very much for your kind suggestion about writing my own book. I have also been advised by several Professional aviation persons to do just that. Therfore your encouragement is appreciated. I’m sure you will agree there is room in the market for a good Victor book. I have indeed been fortunate to have access to many documents on the subject, and spoken to many who served on the Victor force. Their tales deserve to be heard. Indeed I was having a very good conversation today with a B1 AEO his tales were facinating. Maybe when I’m closer to completing my manuscript you can help with reccomending folk to proof read etc, to help me make sure of my accuracy?

Thanks for your kind support.

Good luck with a book on a different side of the Victor to me. I will see what I can do to help when you have reached that stage.

Roger

Roger thankyou very much for your kind suggestion about writing my own book. I have also been advised by several Professional aviation persons to do just that. Therfore your encouragement is appreciated. I’m sure you will agree there is room in the market for a good Victor book. I have indeed been fortunate to have access to many documents on the subject, and spoken to many who served on the Victor force. Their tales deserve to be heard. Indeed I was having a very good conversation today with a B1 AEO his tales were facinating. Maybe when I’m closer to completing my manuscript you can help with reccomending folk to proof read etc, to help me make sure of my accuracy?

Thanks for your kind support.

Many thanks Ian for your comments on my book. I therefore suggest that you write your own as I did and correct all my errors as suggested to me over 20 years ago by a very good friend in the professional aviation world and I did as he said.

Thanks again

A far as I can find out the K2 never took of with 128,000 lbs of fuel as the aircraft was Not cleared for that load, but during the Falklands Campaign when airborne and at operating height they were topped up by another tanker who then returned to Wideawake. See my book for all approved loads in Volume 2 It might have well been done at the AAEE but not confirmed. Heavy weight Take Off’s trials were carried out by HP and HSA at RAE Bedford .

Which is why I did not state it took off at that capacity, Roger. The theoretical capacity of all the tanks were 127-128,000lb as all aircraft were hand built no definitive capacity can be accurately stated. I believe the maximum take off load was 123,000lbs. The listed Max take off weight was 223,00lb. I didn’t use your book for my figures, as frustratingly I’ve found it not totally reliable on all facts printed.

The actual wingspan of a Victor K2 was 117 ft not 110 ft that was the span of the MK1, the B2 had a span of 120ft. The span was reduced on the K to improve the stresses. The Victor could carry a 35,000lb conventinal bomb load in the Bomb bay which was 14 more than a Vulcan. Fuel wise she could carry a 128,000lb fuel. That’s in the tanking role. But rarely did so I believe.

A far as I can find out the K2 never took of with 128,000 lbs of fuel as the aircraft was Not cleared for that load, but during the Falklands Campaign when airborne and at operating height they were topped up by another tanker who then returned to Wideawake. See my book for all approved loads in Volume 2 It might have well been done at the AAEE but not confirmed. Heavy weight Take Off’s trials were carried out by HP and HSA at RAE Bedford .

Roger Brooks

The actual wingspan of a Victor K2 was 117 ft not 110 ft that was the span of the MK1, the B2 had a span of 120ft. The span was reduced on the K to improve the stresses. The Victor could carry a 35,000lb conventinal bomb load in the Bomb bay which was 14 more than a Vulcan. Fuel wise she could carry a 128,000lb fuel. That’s in the tanking role. But rarely did so I believe.

The heavy load that needed to be carried by a tanker aircraft coupled with the intense flying associated with air-to-air refuelling in those days placed a considerable strain on the airframe. For the Mk 2 conversions, Handley Page where considering wing-tip tanks as a way of off-loading and so minimising bending stresses in the wing. Hawker Siddeley didn’t bother and simply reduced the bending stresses by shorting the wingspan. This was probably the cheapest solution for them. The “smallish” reduction in span involved wouldn’t affect the lifting capacity provided that a long enough runway was available to reach the increased take-off speed. I would have liked to have seen a fully-loaded K.2 take-off. It may have been a slightly alarming experience. Good job we had all those long runways.

She could carry 10-12 tonnes more than the Vulcan (but I guess half of that was extra fuel) and faster and 2.3 times the range… well according to Wiki anyway… LOL!
Wingspan: 110 ft 0 in
Empty weight: 89,030 lb (40,468 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 205,000 lb (93,182 kg) So she could be a heavy bird to take off…

Makes sense to me. Were they shortened by enough to limit their lifting capacity?

“The contract for conversion was instead awarded to Hawker Siddeley, who produced a much simpler conversion than that planned by Handley Page, with the wingspan shortened to reduce wing bending stress and hence extend airframe life.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handley_Page_Victor