Arggh?How did a limited number of Vulcans get to the falkland Islands and back?
Simply by refueling vulcans with vulcans
how is that possible?
circular yes?
they refueled themselves all the way to the falklands and back with only a few USAF tankers in the sky... not enough to to do it with tankers alone
One of the most misunderstood logistics of modern warfare in the air is range vs load
read: Vulcan Boys by Tony Blackman
not until you do will you realize how far ahead of the world we are in USN carrier based refueling drones
but admit it... you dont know much
and really dont want to
If they have a warp drive, surely they can cross a bit of ocean.How did a limited number of Vulcans get to the falkland Islands and back?
Simply by refueling vulcans with vulcans
how is that possible?
circular yes?
they refueled themselves all the way to the falklands and back with only a few USAF tankers in the sky... not enough to to do it with tankers alone
One of the most misunderstood logistics of modern warfare in the air is range vs load
read: Vulcan Boys by Tony Blackman
not until you do will you realize how far ahead of the world we are in USN carrier based refueling drones
but admit it... you dont know much
and really dont want to
they refueled themselves all the way to the falklands and back with only a few USAF tankers in the sky... not enough to to do it with tankers alone
Oh, and fact error here. They never used US tankers to do that mission. All refueling was done by other Vulcans configured as tankers.
Now it is true that the US did replace the tankers typically in the air on regular missions so that the Vulcans could be retasked to that mission. But the mission itself used only UK assets.
Then the moving to drone tankers. No idea where you are even trying to go with this, but whatever.
The tankers were Victors. Not Vulcans.
The V-Force bombers were indeed amazing for the time.
The Vulcans also managed to nuclear bomb the US twice in the largest ever wargames and the US airforce were amazed.
It's not always simply about throwing money at the military sometimes companies can just make great aircraft and at that time we had 3 of them.
It also helps that they all looked wonderfully futuristic.
So when you see all the work going into flat tip refueling drones you get a better feel for how they are planed to be used in the Pacific.
jupThe Vulcans were refueled by Victor tankers which were refueled by other Victor tankers en route.
So come back all yee so ill-read as to not recognize the Roman god of fire, "vulcan" as the the name applied by Avro Aviation to the flying aircraft herein described and one used so brilliantly by the Royal Air Force to send the ultimate message to the Argentinians from the Queen of England via Prime Minister Marguerite Thatcher "DON'T STEP ON ME" AND NOT the racial moniker for Capt Spock
I came here to help you understand who and what your military and our research are designing and building for your safety even though it makes you uncomfortable in your hideous ignorance. It does I know. You hate me... you need to hate me for rubbing your Patriot Missile command face into the sand.
The Vulcans were refueled by Victor tankers which were refueled by other Victor tankers en route.
Maybe someone can find where I read that vulcans could refuel Vulcans with storage bladders? been looking but can't find it.... they replace bomb bay with fuel.jup
missed that
I think one or two other vulcans could have been rifted for fuel in bomb bay
I';;; have to read it again
thanks
Maybe someone can find where I read that vulcans could refuel Vulcans with storage bladders? been looking but can't find it.... they replace bomb bay with fuel.
Victor tankers were used all the way up to the end of Desert Storm in 1991.They would never have needed to, as the Vulcan is what was used to replace the Victors. At that point the remaining Victors were repurposed to recon and fueling missions. And with so many of those in inventory there was no reason to convert Vulcans.
In fact, those remained in service a bit longer, as the Vulcans were retired in 1984. The Victor was ultimately replaced by the converted VC10 jetliner, and the L-1011 (also both retired), and they now use the A330.
Kind of overkill, as they no longer use strategic bombers.
Actually the Victor as a bomber came in a little bit after the Vulcans as a hedge against what was seen as the Vulcan's riskier design.They would never have needed to, as the Vulcan is what was used to replace the Victors. At that point the remaining Victors were repurposed to recon and fueling missions. And with so many of those in inventory there was no reason to convert Vulcans.
In fact, those remained in service a bit longer, as the Vulcans were retired in 1984. The Victor was ultimately replaced by the converted VC10 jetliner, and the L-1011 (also both retired), and they now use the A330.
Kind of overkill, as they no longer use strategic bombers.
Victor tankers were used all the way up to the end of Desert Storm in 1991.
Two are still in taxiable condition. The last one to fly made an accidental take off about 20 years ago while conducting a "fast taxi".They were retired from active service in 1993, today almost all of them have been scrapped. I believe there are only 4 or 5 left. all in museums.
Actually the Victor as a bomber came in a little bit after the Vulcans as a hedge against what was seen as the Vulcan's riskier design.
This reminds me of a story told by a Royal Air Force Victor commander who landed at the U.S. Andersen Air Force Base (Guam). He was greeted by a USAF ground crew member who asked him "Sir? Is that Vulcan?".But they were being retired by 1968 as bombers. They continued on as recon and fueling aircraft, but the bomber role was moved to the Vulcan.
Not unlike the A-4, literally a Korean War era fighter that still saw service until 2003. But it was no longer used for combat, it had long ago been replaced by the F-18. But it continued as a fueler once the A-3 was retired for another 2 decades. But their actual combat role was ended by the late 1970's, other than their use as an adversary OPFOR aircraft at TOPGUN. Typically standing in for the MiG-17 "Fresco". It did not look much like the MiG-17, but it shared many of the same flight characteristics and was obviously not one of the aircraft (F-14, F-18) that they actually taught the pilots in the school in.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?