Why Don't We Hear Of The Valiant?

chaz #68, sabrejet #69. These lists are selective, quantities inconsistent with inventory identified in Type literature by Serial Number. Where in FY54 are France’s Bearcats, Invaders, Corsairs, in FY57 Privateers; why do FY57 Hunters rise from 312, 30/9/56 to 537 30/3/57, and drop to 0 30/6/57? What France had from MSP in FY57 was not 218 MD452 but 223 MD454 Mystere IVA, and they did not drop to 0 in 9/57.

UK inventory: #68: we had 52 P2V which matches 51 in FY53 (we lost some); we had 84, not 56 B-29 (+3 ELINTs, call them the 3 RB-29). 430, not 421 F-86E set off for RAF, but some were lost en route: but 370 of the airframes were funded under the UK/Canada Mutual Defence Agreement (RT Wakelam, Cold War Fighters, UBCP, 2012, P.90); only their GE engines were funded by MSP, so why are they in this list at all? Where in FY53 are the 100 TBM-3C/E, 50 AD-4W, 20 Hiller H.T.1, 25 HRS-2/HO4S-1 Whirlwind, 59 HO3S-1 Dragonfly?

Pres.Truman signed the Mutual Defense Assistance Act, 6/10/49, France being early (?first*) beneficiary; UK/US MDA was signed 27/1/50 (70 of the B-29s being first up). Most assets were transferred from extant DoD inventory. MDAP was superseded by 10/10/51 Mutual Support Act, which also subsumed 3/4/48 European Cooperation Act (Marshall Aid), which was intended to rebuild Allies’ economies: so MSP included bespoke-new build and Offshore Procurement. So where in #69 FY57 is the MSP part-funding of….well, almost everything, except only Vulcan/Victor: Gannet, Seamew, Sea Hawk, Shackleton, Javelin…: I have 367 Hunter F.4/RAF and 31 RDan.AF? Other MSP Offshore end-items included 117 Aquilon (Sea Venom), new Meteor N.F.11 to RDanAF/France(20/25), ex-RAF examples to RBAF/France(24/16).

MDAP/MSP, which was extended far and wide to US Allies (Noratlas, Mistral, F-86K…) deserves its equivalent of the 3 books I have on Lend/Lease: few aircraft types’ information is constant across all 3, so a patient man is awaited.

(*amended 8/12/15: http://www.nato.int/archives/1st5years/chapters/3.htm says 1st. deliveries were Hellcats onto FN Dixmude in US, 8/3/50).

…hence my comments regarding these lists in Post 69. Great deal of in-depth stuff at TNA however.

Perhaps there wasn’t so much inter service rivalry in the U.S armed forces as there was in the British !

I found the Valiant reference I had been looking for … in a Valiant article by Dr Norman Barfield, Air International September 1992, p161….’Sir George Edwards recalls a much less well-known but intriguing ‘what might have been’ in the Valiant programme…the redoubtable General Curtiss LeMay, Head of Strategic Air Command led a high-level U.S.A.F team visit to Weybridge to study the Valiant further. Much impressed by its take-off performance, they were even toying with the idea of putting it on an aircraft carrier’…Barfield later claims that one result of the visit was that the B-52 was switched to side-by-side seating as in the Valiant from the tandem arrangement in the B-52 prototype.
The obvious first question is ‘why would LeMay have any interest in a U.S. Navy carrier initiative?’

Really nice to see this thread continue, didn’t realise it was so long since it started. Hi Pipsqueak, we met at Newark last year and I know you’re interest is still well and truly alive.
So:-

My Valiant Mk 3 Seat is out of WZ 367 and is the 1st pilots seat,which is very significant as that Aircraft followed 15 minutes behind 366 taking pics. during that first atomic bomb test at “Operation Buffalo”. Not that this seat was necessarily in 367 at the time, but it is linked and that is enough for me as I was involved in “Blue Steel ” Trials at Edinburgh Field, South Aussie some 6 years after the “Operation Buffalo” Valiants flew from there. Was probably rubbing shoulders with the Air and ground crew from “Buffalo” too, but I didn’t realise the historical significance till some 50 years later.

So, yes, time has passed and as you guys realize too, “where has all the Valiant stuff gone ?” Mostly to the Scrappies (Like the rest of the Valiants,) but digging into places has shown collectors have some bits. But how deep are your pockets ? — lol !! I’ve managed to collect about 90% of parts for my seat, and although I’m very happy about that, It has taken quite some time not to mention cost of some items. This is my seat after purchase from previous owner, who got it out of the South Wales Aircraft Museum during closure. It was covered in pigeon “Poo” and looks like it used to hang from the roof there. But it has been really well stripped, including the data plates, which is a shame, but beggars cannot be choosers and I felt very lucky to have come across this seat. Intention is to restore it, but family life and problems always get in the way, but one day, one day !!

Other pics. are how a Valiant seat should look. Pic. of WZ 367 in her final days at what I think is RAF Marham, not long before scrapping. Why she was painted in these colours I know not, but she certainly looked nice.

Bill T.

Hi ….. sorry for the late response …… only just picked up on it. Sorry but your colour image of WZ 367 was not taken at Marham. I think that she was detached to Vickers for mods when the end came and was at Weighbridge.
She was camouflaged under mod. number 3261 With Effect From 19-12-63, as part of SACEur Bomber Force as were 25 other airframes. No details as to which airframes were affected. This initial batch would have covered [ no pun intended ] all of the Marham aircraft. It was for the low level role. Later under the same mod. no. but effective from 23-01-64, a further 31 other airframes were selected for the same scheme. The re-painting was interrupted by the demise of the aircraft a short while later. I have a list of the airframe numbers that were finished in this scheme, but it is not an official or complete record, but compiled from my extensive photograph records.
Camouflaged:
WP218 – 219 – 221.
WZ367 – 393 – 401 – 403 – 404.
XD818 – 819 – 823 – 824 825 – 828 – 829 – 860 – 862.

Pete…

US DoD Funding

chaz #68, sabrejet #69. These lists are selective, quantities inconsistent with inventory identified in Type literature by Serial Number. Where in FY54 are France’s Bearcats, Invaders, Corsairs, in FY57 Privateers; why do FY57 Hunters rise from 312, 30/9/56 to 537 30/3/57, and drop to 0 30/6/57? What France had from MSP in FY57 was not 218 MD452 but 223 MD454 Mystere IVA, and they did not drop to 0 in 9/57.

UK inventory: #68: we had 52 P2V which matches 51 in FY53 (we lost some); we had 84, not 56 B-29 (+3 ELINTs, call them the 3 RB-29). 430, not 421 F-86E set off for RAF, but some were lost en route: but 370 of the airframes were funded under the UK/Canada Mutual Defence Agreement (RT Wakelam, Cold War Fighters, UBCP, 2012, P.90); only their GE engines were funded by MSP, so why are they in this list at all? Where in FY53 are the 100 TBM-3C/E, 50 AD-4W, 20 Hiller H.T.1, 25 HRS-2/HO4S-1 Whirlwind, 59 HO3S-1 Dragonfly?

Pres.Truman signed the Mutual Defense Assistance Act, 6/10/49, France being early (?first*) beneficiary; UK/US MDA was signed 27/1/50 (70 of the B-29s being first up). Most assets were transferred from extant DoD inventory. MDAP was superseded by 10/10/51 Mutual Support Act, which also subsumed 3/4/48 European Cooperation Act (Marshall Aid), which was intended to rebuild Allies’ economies: so MSP included bespoke-new build and Offshore Procurement. So where in #69 FY57 is the MSP part-funding of….well, almost everything, except only Vulcan/Victor: Gannet, Seamew, Sea Hawk, Shackleton, Javelin…: I have 367 Hunter F.4/RAF and 31 RDan.AF? Other MSP Offshore end-items included 117 Aquilon (Sea Venom), new Meteor N.F.11 to RDanAF/France(20/25), ex-RAF examples to RBAF/France(24/16).

MDAP/MSP, which was extended far and wide to US Allies (Noratlas, Mistral, F-86K…) deserves its equivalent of the 3 books I have on Lend/Lease: few aircraft types’ information is constant across all 3, so a patient man is awaited.

(*amended 8/12/15: http://www.nato.int/archives/1st5years/chapters/3.htm says 1st. deliveries were Hellcats onto FN Dixmude in US, 8/3/50).

GOKO: 1/5/60 serviceability (across a 5-day working week) as: 57%/Valiant, 39%/Vulcan B.1, 33%/Victor B.1. This “Interim” type in effect created the Medium Bomber Force: 1,475 aircrew passed out on type from the OCU, many (?most) later onto the higher-fliers. It was no fault of the type (or of its manufacturer) that “we have had (Valiant for >3 years) it was not until (’57) that we had (1) complete to operational standards.” (BC AOCinC, 2/6/58. Wynn,Pp.150,308,467). Through 1955-58 Valiant paved the way for all operational aspects of Vulcan/Victor. If we had no Valiant, then much delay before the thermonuclear Deterrent could have been Declared Operational.

Exactly the same can be said for, say, Javelin, technologically concurrent with Valiant, paving the way for (what we, by mid-1950s, were calling a) Weapons System. Lightning could not have been deployed onto Meteor/Venom infrastructure; Victor/Vulcan straight into Canberra Units would have been indigestible. Credit what was achieved…but more Javelins, more Valiants, could not have done what Lightning/Victor/Vulcan achieved.

VALIANT SUCCESS

I did a thread a few years back to celebrate Valiant’s 60th and as the first of the V’s. There are various images and cockpit survivor shots on PDf on it along with notes from the 2nd prototype etc, no objections if the moderator wants to move them here to make it larger and keep things going. Valiant was a success story which flew the flag for almost a decade and was useful to the last, while she crucially held the sole responsibility for a time to deliver nuclear weapons if needed before the other 2 more sophisticated V designs came along. One author wrote in Flypast some years back that she would only ever be remembered for being the bomber that was was withdrawn due to the spar corrosion that gave her a finite life from the beginning, but I disagree.

I think that as time wears on people will realise what a fine design the aircraft was, and with considerable scope for development besides the lamented B2, that the notable Vickers team also originated – at least one was supersonic. I believe I saw an old article saying that in fact she too had a crescent wing even if it wasn’t as ‘kinked’ as the Victor, certainly the design of it was important enough for Vickers to patent it. The Airfix kit in recent times has helped to make people aware of Valiant along with the better display of her at Cosford (though the interior of their suspended Lightning is in a poor state). The proof is in thes more books come along and online discussion like this continues I have no doubt that Valiant’s considerable ability, testing achievements and records will reach the wider audience they deserve to.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?110023-Vickers-Valiant-Tribute-1st-Of-The-V-Bombers

Hi Strato,
Rgr D, thanks for that, all these bits of info add up to make an interesting pic.

Bill T.

In the photo of WZ367 she appears to have some Structural damage on the side of the foward fuselage.
She ended her days at Weybridge in 1965 having been used for Structural repair trials.
Great thread.

Markk12, re post 27. No matter your now ancient mode of travel, look at those apprentices Route Lining the taxiway. If you went back to the main gate, you would find a 6ft+ guy with chocolate all over his lovingly cleaned and gleaming bayonet. Some horrible little child behind me decided this was great fun. The Queen and her entourage were approaching so now’t could be done. I still remember the pride we apprentices felt being at that auspicious occasion. Much better than those many thankless London Mall Route Linings we did on State Occasions. Timeless Photo thank you!

Here is a page from one of the reports. I now believe they are tablets of stone, note the United Kingdom total

I have these reports too, but they are not MDAP-specific documents (USAF Statistical Digest – IIRC they cover all USAF annual reporting, not just MDAP and thus are considerably redacted). They also don’t cover negotiations on aircraft which didn’t eventually receive Gift Aid. As I mentioned, you’d need a good trawl through TNA to finally confirm that Valiants were never under discussion.

Edit: this one from FY 1957 is more telling: it shows Hunters and Mysteres among indigenous MAP-funded types, but nothing non-US in ‘bombers’.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]242392[/ATTACH]

Here is a page from one of the reports. I now believe they are tablets of stone, note the United Kingdom total

Wow !!! Thread still going.

Really nice to see this thread continue, didn’t realise it was so long since it started. Hi Pipsqueak, we met at Newark last year and I know you’re interest is still well and truly alive.
So:-

My Valiant Mk 3 Seat is out of WZ 367 and is the 1st pilots seat,which is very significant as that Aircraft followed 15 minutes behind 366 taking pics. during that first atomic bomb test at “Operation Buffalo”. Not that this seat was necessarily in 367 at the time, but it is linked and that is enough for me as I was involved in “Blue Steel ” Trials at Edinburgh Field, South Aussie some 6 years after the “Operation Buffalo” Valiants flew from there. Was probably rubbing shoulders with the Air and ground crew from “Buffalo” too, but I didn’t realise the historical significance till some 50 years later.

So, yes, time has passed and as you guys realize too, “where has all the Valiant stuff gone ?” Mostly to the Scrappies (Like the rest of the Valiants,) but digging into places has shown collectors have some bits. But how deep are your pockets ? — lol !! I’ve managed to collect about 90% of parts for my seat, and although I’m very happy about that, It has taken quite some time not to mention cost of some items. This is my seat after purchase from previous owner, who got it out of the South Wales Aircraft Museum during closure. It was covered in pigeon “Poo” and looks like it used to hang from the roof there. But it has been really well stripped, including the data plates, which is a shame, but beggars cannot be choosers and I felt very lucky to have come across this seat. Intention is to restore it, but family life and problems always get in the way, but one day, one day !!

Other pics. are how a Valiant seat should look. Pic. of WZ 367 in her final days at what I think is RAF Marham, not long before scrapping. Why she was painted in these colours I know not, but she certainly looked nice.

Bill T.

Reading some of the older stuff on this thread brought back memories of my apprenticeship at Weybridge. It is quite possible that I worked on XD 818 in 1957(?) as I was with the section installing the flight refuelling system & being a smallish guy I usually ended up trying to fit the nuts onto the cup where the fuel pipe exited the cabin area where the pipe then ran aft to the pipes that passed under the jet pipes within their stainless steel jackets – thats IIRC! It was too easy to overtighten the nuts which could then shear the 2 BA bolts!
Can’t be many of us left!!
Keith

Many thanks for this. But I have official sources from America and accounts of the USAF on an annual basis. There is still nothing I have found that supports this view. I wonder what budget they are talking about because the MDAP budget says nothing about this at all. Maybe Mutual Assistance Program was different from Mutual Defence Assistance Program but on checking they are both the same. There is a definition in one of the paragraphs called “Grant Aid” Military aid granted foreign countries under terms of Mutual Defense Assistance appropriation
on a non-reimbursable basis. But there is nothing there and also in Off-shore. nothing there.
My source is USAF Summaries for 1945-2005, thousands of pages, nothing there

If there is anything in the UK on this, it will be at The National Archives. However on looking through many files on MAP/MDAP Sabres over the years at TNA, though I did come across references to Hunters etc, (and indeed MAP-funded Spey-engined F-105K proposals and sale of same to Iran!), there was not a jot on Valiants.

Thus I suspect this is yet another case of incorrect information being repeatedly plagiarised into fact!

chax #60. Initially 75% of the cost of 125 Canberras and 12 Valiants were in 1953 Mutual Security Act. H.Leigh-Phippard, Congress and US Military Aid to Britain, Macmillan,1995,P.91. More later. Wynn,P.55 has “About half the cost of Valiant procurement was paid for under the US (MAP)”.

Many thanks for this. But I have official sources from America and accounts of the USAF on an annual basis. There is still nothing I have found that supports this view. I wonder what budget they are talking about because the MDAP budget says nothing about this at all. Maybe Mutual Assistance Program was different from Mutual Defence Assistance Program but on checking they are both the same. There is a definition in one of the paragraphs called “Grant Aid” Military aid granted foreign countries under terms of Mutual Defense Assistance appropriation
on a non-reimbursable basis. But there is nothing there and also in Off-shore. nothing there.
My source is USAF Summaries for 1945-2005, thousands of pages, nothing there

chax #60. Initially 75% of the cost of 125 Canberras and 12 Valiants were in 1953 Mutual Security Act. H.Leigh-Phippard, Congress and US Military Aid to Britain, Macmillan,1995,P.91. More later. Wynn,P.55 has “About half the cost of Valiant procurement was paid for under the US (MAP)”.

Valiant XD818

Valiant XD818 in RAF Cosford 11 September 2015

Re Valiant XD818, When Cosford first started the Open Cockpits Event I contacted them to ask would the Valiant be on the list.
The answer I got was no, And when I asked why they said she was of National importance and was not accesible to the public to protect her long term.
Then they relented and contacted me to say they would open her up and I could look in, but not enter.
By then when I attempted to book a place on the open cockpit event it was sold out.
The Valiant paved the way for the V-force and we are Lucky to have XD818 still with us thanks to some tenacious individuals.

American assistance

Why though do we not hear much said about the Valiant?
1,475 fine flyers passed out on type, but it had been procured as Interim, crew and Units to roll into “proper” Medium Bombers. T.660 was deleted early in MoS’ June,1947 Bids Appraisal as no better than the funded Interim, Short Sperrin. Early delivery was unwanted as Blue Danube was in hand for 1956 deployment, matching (to be) Victor/Vulcan.

On 3/4/48 first Marshall Aid (ERP) $ arrived in UK, just as Berlin brewed (Blockade from May). On 14/4/48 Govt. Tasked Chiefs to arrest a Red thrust on the Luneberg Plain – till then we had no enemy. RR and V-A, at that time idle or worse, resurrected T.660+Big AJ.65 (the little one not then working) and committed (reputation, not money – such ideas had not then reached UK) to deploy within 1955. On 16/4/48 Attlee gave them some of our ERP windfall, for development, not production, to re-insure the already-insured “real” Medium.

Korea, November,1950. AWA still building (Abraham) Lincolns! US gives us B-29 Washingtons and, 9/2/51, half the money to order 25 Valiant B.1 NOW please! Good job done by industry: last of 107 delivered 27/8/57…but because it was a truck. Wynn (RAF Strategic Official History),P.371 has recognition that the type was vulnerable to MiG-17 (deployed 1953). It could even be intercepted by early non-reheat, blind Javelins. Its version of NBS had problems finding Suez airfields where brass had been based until a few months earlier (Wynn, P.131/2).

It remained in service after proper types arrived because:
– P.R (to be) S.R had been neglected, and: – K had been invented, so this platform could serve; and:
– Saceur came up with money and Bombs for it to replace TBF Canberra B.6. Fatigue did for it 9/12/64, because it had never been designed to fly low or often.

This is all very interesting. I was researching the Mutual Defence Assistance Program for a publisher and was lucky enough to find the USAF annual accounts for MDAP. These included totals such as Washington, Neptune, Hunter etc. year by year. I have gone through many years and found nothing to support the view that the Valiant received any funding from the United States, or for that matter the Canberra. As a boy I was at Raynham and it was pointed out that the Canberras with black bombays and undercarriage wells were American funded! “Yes Chiefly.” Well its”… no chiefy.” Maybe there was some other budget but I have found nothing. I did find that the Royal Air Farce was allocated 170 Washingtons through Mutual Assistance and that included 3 RB-29 machines with about 89 in front line service. The totals varied year by year. These aircraft were to be allocated to SAC in the event of war, crewed by the RAF and were nuclear capable. As for the Valiant, that was a honey of an aeroplane