Jump to content

Handley Page Victor B.1 and 2 differences


71chally

Recommended Posts

Great diagrams again John.  Funny I was reading  a Flight article recently when they visited a B.2 Sqn in the early period and they referred to the window countermeasures, the Victors clearly didn't have the over wing pods fitted and I wondered where it was dispensed.  Your diagrams have cleared that up!

 

Is the upper center section diagram shown that of the B.1?  You can see a difference with the wing centre sections, the bottom one looking like it shows the B.2s inboard wing extension.

 

So, basic question,

if new wing centre section/intake parts were available, could we in fact make the Airfix B.2 into a B.1?

Idealy you want a new fin base and wing tip parts, but they aren't too hard to correct using DIY methods.

From the info so far it looks like it isn't an impossible job?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully the good folk here do not mind me straying a little, however can we also explore the subtle differences between the early Victor B.2 in comparison to the B.2(BS) as kitted by Airfix? 

 

For some reason I am taking a liking to an early B.2 without Kauchmann carrots, underwing tanks and refuelling probe. 

 

Photos also suggest a smaller intake at the base of the vertical fin would need to be modified/scratch built in order to replicate this area accurately. Does anyone know if the larger intake (as supplied by Airfix) was ever fitted to early B.2's (i.e. without the items mentioned above) or was this intake added at the same time that the probe and carrots were installed? 

 

In summary - what I'm trying to say is, can I get away with not modifying the kits fin and leave off all the other bits!!  

 

I'd appreciate any advice or information that may exist that details the subtle differences between these two Victor B.2 versions. 

 

Kind regards... Dave. 

Edited by Rabbit Leader
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27 December 2016 at 10:19 AM, Rabbit Leader said:

Hopefully the good folk here do not mind me straying a little, however can we also explore the subtle differences between the early Victor B.2 in comparison to the B.2(BS) as kitted by Airfix? 

 

For some reason I am taking a liking to an early B.2 without Kauchmann carrots, underwing tanks and refuelling probe. 

 

Photos also suggest a smaller intake at the base of the vertical fin would need to be modified/scratch built in order to replicate this area accurately. Does anyone know if the larger intake (as supplied by Airfix) was ever fitted to early B.2's (i.e. without the items mentioned above) or was this intake added at the same time that the probe and carrots were installed? 

 

In summary - what I'm trying to say is, can I get away with not modifying the kits fin and leave off all the other bits!!  

 

I'd appreciate any advice or information that may exist that details the subtle differences between these two Victor B.2 versions. 

 

Kind regards... Dave. 

 

Dave,

 

this may help.  Please also note that as well as leaving off the tanks, oil coolers and the "carrots", there was only one flow vane in each engine intake on the original B.Mk.2's, as shown in the photographs below.  The kit has two in each.  Im answer to your primary question as to the fin extension - No.  The original extension was there to provide cooling air for the Red Steer tail warning radar.  On the retrofitted aircraft, as depicted in the kit, the extension was enlarged to contain a glycol header tank for the ECM cooling system.

5dVyuAc.jpg

HTH

 

Dennis

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, canberra kid said:

Some more Victor B.1 numbers and drawings to mull over.

 

 

Vic5_zpsfxym229t.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

John

 

The seat as illustrated by John, (Thanks for those J - now if you could find some Nose Flap drawings - everybody would be obliged !,) above was the original rear crew seat in all marks of Victor up to the Retrofit aircraft (Blue Steel and Recce versions).  The swivel seat as kitted by Airfix replaced the one illustrated except for the Crew Chief who had to make do with the one above.   On the tanker, the CC was given a swivel seat and actual foot rests (luxury - pure luxury !!).  Sixth seats were normally only fitted during deployment away when a Crew Chief was required to travel with the aircraft or during exercises/crew classification flights when an Umpire was required.  Despite having a large comfortable cabin, it could get quite claustrophobic with Nav bags, ration boxes, personal luggage etc and etc cramming up the place.

 

The kit cockpit has been based on the K.2 cockpit for the simple reason, the lads at Airfix had nothing else to go on. 

 

Illustrated below is my seat for a quick trip Malta - UK in 1969.  To be absolutely accurate, the Dinghy pack must be made of concrete - 'cause that's what it felt like after a few minutes sitting on it !! :-

 

7lubj6k.jpg

 

HTH

Dennis

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent drawings and info again John and Dennis.

 

So, to get this straight, all B.2s had nose flaps apart from XM713 - XM718 which were built with drooped leading edges.

Were the other B / SR.2s then retrofitted with the drooped leading edges, or just the K.2 tankers?

 

John, have you got anything there that confirms the main undercarriage track of the B.2?

 

 

Edited by 71chally
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, canberra kid said:

 

Nothing on the B.2 track James just this for the B.1 are they not the same?

John

 

That's what I'm trying to establish, they probably are the same, but the wing of the B.2 is extended by 3ft or so at its inboard sections, in theory that would widen the u/c track, unless that was moved inboard by the corresponding amount.

 

The B.1 track is listed earlier in the thread but can't find the B.2 one, so probably are the same then.

 

Great info on the leading edges.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

Roger E. Brooks excellent two volume book about the Victor gives the wheel track of the B.1's as 30ft 2in as already reported. The track of the B.2's is given with 33ft 2in, the same increase as for the wingspan from B.1 to B.2. As far as I understand, the increase in wingspan for the B.2 was added within the engine section of the wing.

Regards,

Martin

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 71chally said:

 

That's what I'm trying to establish, they probably are the same, but the wing of the B.2 is extended by 3ft or so at its inboard sections, in theory that would widen the u/c track, unless that was moved inboard by the corresponding amount.

 

The B.1 track is listed earlier in the thread but can't find the B.2 one, so probably are the same then.

 

Great info on the leading edges.

 

 

 

 

54 minutes ago, MVW said:

Hello,

Roger E. Brooks excellent two volume book about the Victor gives the wheel track of the B.1's as 30ft 2in as already reported. The track of the B.2's is given with 33ft 2in, the same increase as for the wingspan from B.1 to B.2. As far as I understand, the increase in wingspan for the B.2 was added within the engine section of the wing.

Regards,

Martin

The wing span of the Victor B.Mk.2 was increased over the B.Mk.1 by a 1ft 6" stub wing at each root and each wing tip extended by 3ft 6"giving a total overall increase in span of 10ft.  This resulted in the ailerons becoming inset as opposed to the B.Mk.1's that went to the tip.

From my original course notes on the B.Mk.2 :-

79Depux.jpg

 

HTH

Dennis 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just waking up with my first coffee for the day and finding all this great new Victor info to ponder over. 

Special thanks to Dennis, John and Chally (Richard?) for putting this all together. 

 

Dennis - I appreciate the info regarding the early B.2 fin fillet intake and am totally surprised about the one less intake vain. I've studied as many photos as I can and have completely missed this detail!! I'm not sure if this is an easy-ish correction to the kits parts as mine has still not arrive as yet. 

 

I also posed a question on another BM thread to suggest that due to the wing leading edge issue 'perhaps' the all white scheme as dipicted as XL512 by Airfix may not be 100% correct if built straight OOB? I do hope that I am incorrect here, however the more we look into this classic aircraft the more we find out - thanks to the kind and knowledgable folk on this great forum. 

 

Once again - from one Victor fan to many others.... a big thanks. 

 

Cheers.. Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 71chally said:

Excellent drawings and info again John and Dennis.

 

So, to get this straight, all B.2s had nose flaps apart from XM713 - XM718 which were built with drooped leading edges.

Were the other B / SR.2s then retrofitted with the drooped leading edges, or just the K.2 tankers?

 

John, have you got anything there that confirms the main undercarriage track of the B.2?

 

 

OK.  With regards to the nose flaps/drooped leading edges, let me deal with just the B.Mk.2 series of aircraft, with only minor reference to earlier marks.

 

Victor B.Mk.2 production comprised the following serial number blocks :-

 

XH668 to XH675 (8 aircraft).  This batch of aircraft were originally to have been built as part of a batch of B.Mk1A's but the contract was changed to B.Mk.2 for the last 8 aircraft.  XH668 was originally known as "The Conway Victor" and first flew on the 20th February 1959.  The aircraft crashed into the Irish Sea the following August, following the detachment of the wing tip pitot heads causing the Mach trim strut to extend automatically pushing the elevators into the nose down position. The remaining aircraft in this batch were retained for various trials including Blue Steel trials in Australia prior to some of them being converted to full Blue Steel/Strategic Recce aircraft. 

 

XL158 to XL165 (8 aircraft)  Most of this batch were retained for various trials including Blue Steel.  XL160 was designated by HP's as the prototype B.Mk.3 with six Sapphire 9 engines, a wing span increased to 137ft and a fuselage length increased by 22ft.  In the end all came to naught and it was completed as a standard B.Mk.2.  Of this batch, XL163 entered service with 139Sqd as a standard B.Mk.2.  XL158 to XL165 were part of a production batch of 18 aircraft, the remainder being XL188 to XL193 (6 aircraft) and XL230 to XL233 (5 aircraft)

 

XL188 to XL193 (6 aircraft)  Most of this batch entered service with either the Intensive Flying Trials Unit ('C' Squadron 232 OCU) at Cottesmore (4 aircraft) or with Numbers 139 and 100 Sqdns at Wittering as original B.Mk.2's.

 

XL230 to XL233 (4 aircraft)  These aircraft entered service as B.Mk.2 aircraft with the IFTU (one aircraft) and with 139 Squadron (two aircraft).

 

XL511 to XL513 (3 aircraft)  It is believed that these aircraft had been originally allocated the serials XL250 to XL252 (as part of a batch XL250 to XL255) but were re-serialled.  Built as B.Mk.2 aircraft and used for various trials they only entered service after conversion to Blue Steel.

 

XM714 to XM718 (5 aircraft) Part of a block of thirty aircraft ordered with the last 25 aircraft being cancelled.  There is also some evidence from time-frames that the first 3 aircraft (XM714 to XM716) had been re-serialled from XL253 to XL255 but as they were almost complete at Radlett were brought into the order for thirty aircraft.  These aircraft were the first and only B.Mk.2's to have the drooped leading edge replacing the Nose Flaps.  Most entered service with 100 Squadron but one aircraft, XM716, entered service with 139 Squadron.

 

For completeness, the serials of the cancelled B.Mk.2's were as follows :- XM719 to XM721 (3 aircraft); XM745 to XM756 (12 aircraft) and XM785 to XM794 (10 aircraft).  It is believed that the last batch of serials would have been Recce versions (designation not known) equipped with the "Red Neck" SLAR pod slung under each wing.

 

Blue Steel and Strategic Recce

With the requirement for the Victor B.Mk.2 to carry the Blue Steel missile, HP's set up what they called a "Retrofit" line at Radlett.  Thirty aircraft would go through the line and emerge of which the first 21 aircraft would be Blue Steel carriers and the remaining nine aircraft would be Strategic Recce aircraft to replace the Valiants of Number 543 Squadron at Wyton.  The aircraft at Wittering would be replaced on a one-for-one basis.  

The first Blue Steel aircraft to arrive at Wittering was XL158 which was allocated to 139 Squadron.  It should be pointed out that, at the time, it was also known as a B.Mk.2 aircraft.  At Wittering and in order to differentiate between the two types of "B.Mk.2" on the base, the Blue Steel aircraft began to be referred to as B.Mk.2 Retrofit very quickly shortened to B.2R.  This was the designation that HP's used but was a completely unofficial one and never adopted by the RAF although it was quoted on internal paperwork on the base.

The decision to convert the last nine aircraft on the Retrofit line at Radlett to Strategic Recce aircraft was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction by the Air Ministry coming out of the potential problems with the Valiant which eventually resulted in its grounding and demise in late 1964.  Thus the Air Ministry had three types of Victor B.Mk.2 either in service or coming in to service and even they realised that new designations were required.  Thus in 1965, the Blue Steel aircraft became Victor B.Mk.2 (BS) and the Recce aircraft became Victor B/SR.Mk.2 aircraft.  

As well as the Blue Steel and aerodynamic modifications to the Retrofit aircraft, the engines were upgraded from Conway R.Co 11's to R.Co.17's given a much increase in thrust.  Oil coolers were added under the engine bays and under wing tanks were to be fitted as standard but due to a basic cock-up by HP's in positioning the bomb-slip that held the tanks to the wing, these were not re-introduced until around late 1965/early 1966 following re-design and incorporation by HP's and also at their expense.  It was found that with 28 Volts applied to the aircraft and especially in the rain, the tanks simply fell off. 

Two extra intake vanes were also added each side, one in each engine intake so to convert the kit back to a standard original B.Mk.2, four intake vanes will have to go but Ill answer that in a reply to Daves recent post (Oz has just woken up and I am assuming that it is tomorrow today over there.

An existing modification to the outer mainplanes of all Marks of Victor, the drooped leading edge, was also incorporated into the changes on the Retrofit aircraft something that they retained until the end of their lives as Tankers,

 

Sorry to bore you, you can wake up now

 

HTH (a bit )

 

Dennis 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dennis.. this helps a lot, how can one be bored with all this detailed info!

Onto my second cuppa now so it's all starting to sink in - I think?

... at least I now know that 'nose flaps' are not located anywhere around the aircrafts nose - good god!! 

 

That is a great way to explain the various differences by serial blocks. It sure helps make sense. 

Your last paragraph mentions that the drooped leading edges where incorporated at the time of the retrofit program (I assume this the BS refit), however photos of XL512 do show evidence that the earlier nose flap configuration was still around even when fitted with BS. Am I interpreting this correctly? Hence my question regarding if the Airfix decals and wing config are correct for the scheme depicted. 

 

Once again - we owe you a bloody big medal for all the info you have now readily provided. 

 

Cheers.. Dave 

( p.s - I hope the Generals reading all this - I believe that he has an early B.2 in the works)

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rabbit Leader said:

... at least I now know that 'nose flaps' are not located anywhere around the aircrafts nose - good god!! 

 

Correct - but if you ever build an early B.Mk.1 or 1A you will have to put vortex generators around the nostrils !! :-

SARNPWs.jpg

 

1 hour ago, Rabbit Leader said:

 

That is a great way to explain the various differences by serial blocks. It sure helps make sense. 

Your last paragraph mentions that the drooped leading edges where incorporated at the time of the retrofit program (I assume this the BS refit), however photos of XL512 do show evidence that the earlier nose flap configuration was still around even when fitted with BS. Am I interpreting this correctly? Hence my question regarding if the Airfix decals and wing config are correct for the scheme depicted. 

 

I am a bit puzzled by that Dave.  All the "Retrofit" aircraft, Blue Steel and SR, had the drooped leading edge mod done to the outer mainplanes leading edges on the "Retrofit line at HP's.  Attached are two photos of XL512 that I sent up to Airfix when assisting them with the kit. :-

ecUKjwC.jpg

 

However :- The two trials aircraft out at Woomera, XH675 and XL161 were standard B.Mk.2 aircraft (pre-Rerofit) modified to carry and fire the missile.  Undersurface shot of XH675 attached :-

uWn6Yho.jpg

 

 

With regards to the intake vanes :-

s4kdU29.jpg

 

OK - tomorrow has finally reached here on the east coast of Scotland and it's now 00:26hrs on Thursday.  I'm off to bed now - shopping tomorrow.  No doubt there will be more questions when I get back.

 

HTH

 

Dennis

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've now re-read this for the third time in the hope that some of the finer details stick. 

 

If i'm correct, these are the 'noticeable' modifications required to convert the Airfix Victor into an early (non Blue Steel) equipped  B.Mk.2. 

 

1. Convert the vertical fin fillet to the smaller size as per the various photographs (a resin conversation would be handy!)

 

2. Do not install the underwing tanks, oil coolers, refuelling probe and Kachmann Carrotts. The oil cooler recesses will require filling. 

 

3. Remove two intake vains from each inner wing, leaving one thin and two thick sections. 

 

4. Use the kit parts provided for the bomb bay and associated doors. 

 

5. If modelling anything other than XM714 - 718, the wing leading edges need to be modified to the earlier 'nose flap' arrangement to represent a straight edge from wing root to tip (I think this step still needs clarification?). 

 

I'm in for this conversation... anyone else?? 

 

 Cheers.. Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rabbit Leader said:

I've now re-read this for the third time in the hope that some of the finer details stick. 

 

If i'm correct, these are the 'noticeable' modifications required to convert the Airfix Victor into an early (non Blue Steel) equipped  B.Mk.2. 

 

1. Convert the vertical fin fillet to the smaller size as per the various photographs (a resin conversation would be handy!)

 

2. Do not install the underwing tanks, oil coolers, refuelling probe and Kachmann Carrotts. The oil cooler recesses will require filling. 

 

3. Remove two intake vains from each inner wing, leaving one thin and two thick sections. 

 

4. Use the kit parts provided for the bomb bay and associated doors. 

 

5. If modelling anything other than XM714 - 718, the wing leading edges need to be modified to the earlier 'nose flap' arrangement to represent a straight edge from wing root to tip (I think this step still needs clarification?). 

 

I'm in for this conversation... anyone else?? 

 

 Cheers.. Dave

Spot on Dave.  Reference Item 5, this may help - I'll let you scale it !.  B.Mk.2 mainplane pre-droop :-

VzGuEdB.jpg

I have probably broken every rule on BM regarding image size !!.  I will explain the numbers tomorrow (thanks to HP - a bit complicated)

 

HTH

 

Dennis

(Good Night)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good night Dennis.. chat later.

I take back my initial thoughts (regarding Airfix's depiction of XL512) and any perceived inaccuracies that I have suggested. 

Your photos are more clearer than mine and I am happy to admit that I was wrong to assume that the aircraft (as kitted) was not quite right.

It's also sobering to know that you were involved with this kit's development - so that's great news to us all (.. and I do not claim to suffer from AMS!).

 

I was typing my earlier post as you had sent yours.. once again these new photographs are superb and go a long way to assist those mad folk who (for some reason) always want a version that's not readily kitted.

 

Cheers.. Dave.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yep same here, superb information and much more than I expected on opening the thread.

 

So the easy way at a distance to distinguish the leading edge flap and drooped leading edge wing is that break in the leading edge line.

 

The intake splitter change is new for as well!

 

I can also see now why the Matchbox  kit is far easier to convert to a B.1, not impossible with the Airfix kit but a lot of planning and careful work needed.

 

Edited by 71chally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gentlemen,

 

thanks very much for the information so far. 

 

Now, if one was to take the retro engineering to the fullest extent, and build that most lovely of airplanes the Victor prototype, one would have to:

 

reduce the wing span as discussed previously, and model the Sapphire intakes.  Leading edge flaps for WB771, with the choice of flaps or drooped leading edge for WB775 according to my sources

 

remove the scale equivalent of 40inches (101.6cm) from the fuselage just forward of the wing

 

reshape the fin leading edge base to something between the B.1 and B.2 shapes

 

have I missed anything?

 

regards

 

Brent

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to model WB771 at some stage as it looked so dramatic in it's black, silver & red paint scheme (as did '775 initially), but I think it will be too difficult with the Airfix kit for me.

 

Most of the mods you mention seem correct, the fin height was greater on the prototypes, but don't know by how much.

I think I've seen reference to the forward fuselage having a slightly different profile to the production aircraft, wondering if that was in the radome shape?

Edited by 71chally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...