Talk:Handley Page Victor

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Handley Page Victor article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Handley Page Victor has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Handley Page Victor is part of the V bombers series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 19, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
September 25, 2018	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Military history: Aviation / British / European / Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Aviation: Aircraft

	Aviation portal This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Deterrence theory#Nuclear weapons and deterrence|nuclear deterrent]] The anchor (Nuclear weapons and deterrence) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Move[edit]

I moved from Handley-Page Victor to Handley Page Victor to bring in line with the articles on the Company and its other products. Sc147 20:36, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Lusty Lindy Link Broken?[edit]

In the external links section, it seems that http://www.lustylindy.co.uk/ is no longer live. Check and remove after a few weeks/months? R5gordini (talk) 09:17, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done after 4 months.TSRL (talk) 14:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

134 Squadron[edit]

According to RAF Squadrons - C G Jefford 134 Squadron was disbanded in 1945 and never reformed...I think you mean 543 Squadron - now added..

Victor Bomb Loads[edit]

Just as a matter of interest, according to Bill Gunston the Victor was designed for the following bomb loads:

Original design requirement:

1 X 10,000lb 'special bomb' - Blue Danube

Alternative loads:

2 X largest-size Blue Boar precision-guided bombs (Blue Boar was later cancelled)

or

1 X 22,000lb Grand Slam plus other assorted smaller weapons

or

2 X 12,000lb Tallboys

or

4 X 10,000lb light-case blast bombs

or

48 X standard 1,000lb bombs

or

39 X 1,000lb Type S sea mines - (written as '39 X 2,000lb' - presumably a typo and referring to 1,000lb 'A Type S' mines)

With reduced fuel load:

76 X 1,000lb bombs - 48 internally plus 28 in external underwing pods - structural provision for pods included but later replaced in trials by overload fuel tanks.

Data from: The V-Bombers - The Handley Page Victor - part 1 by Bill Gunston - Aeroplane Monthly - January 1981 issue.

Ian Dunster 12:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Error ??[edit]

"The B.2 was an improved Victor powered by the Rolls-Royce Conway RCo.11 turbojet engines providing 17,250 lbf (76.8 kN)."

But the Conway was a turbofan engine, not a turbojet (apparently the first turbofan). As I am not an expert on this matter, I will leave it to somebody else to correct it, if it is an error. Jason404 (talk) 20:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The RR Conway supplied 22,500 lbs of static thrust

Michael HOW —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.207.120.96 (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are right it is a turbofan, I have corrected it. MilborneOne (talk) 23:50, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ommision in 'accidents and incidents' section[edit]

I know nothing about editing Wikipedia, so hopefully someone will do that for me. I have just discovered that two of my relatives were killed by a crash of a Victor B2 in Stubton Lincolnshire 23rd March 1962. Two crew were also killed. More detail is available here [1]

--Tornadodad (talk) 20:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a few more of the more notable accidents to the article. MilborneOne (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CEP[edit]

Those claimed for the Victor is a waaay too large. Here a document (PDF) in which is described how the Victor could obtain less than 250 yd from 45 kft high level bombing. http://www.rin.org.uk/Uploadedpdfs/ItemAttachments/Norman%20Bonnor%20-%20presentation-web.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.0.22 (talk) 14:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

XA934[edit]

The accident summary XA934 is wrong, it did not suffer a further double engine failure, on take off No4 exploded and set No3 on fire which was contained. it circled for a few hours burning off fuel om final approach did not have 3 greens, did a low pass to put searchlights on the suspect Stbd undercarriage, told ok, went for final go round and remaining two engines No1&2) shut down.

Accident board put it down to fuel system mismanagement as there was plenty of fuel in wing tanks on the portside . https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=55304.

Dave232 (talk) 23:12, 17 December 2016 (UTC)dave[reply]

Well it did suffer a double engine failure although we dont mention fuel mis-managment, the source you point to is not particularly reliable do you have anything better we can source it from. MilborneOne (talk) 11:52, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Handley Page Victor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:47, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Handley Page Victor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:01, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Number of crew[edit]

It says there are five crew, then later says ejector seats were installed for all six. Some of the accidents say four, but is that tankers?

I dont think there is any room for more than five, two pilots at the front and three rearcrew sitting side-by side facing backwards. MilborneOne (talk) 19:50, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Avro Vulcan had a fourth seat downstairs, side-ways facing. (In the first of the Blackbuck Raids this seat was occupied by an air-to-air refuelling specialist who swapped with the co-pilot for refuelling only.) Perhaps the Victor had the same. Dolphin (t) 23:41, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First supersonic flight date[edit]

The article states that the first time the Victor broke the sound barrier was 1 June 1956. I just happened on a newspaper item from 7 June 1957 about how a Handley Page Victor had become the biggest aircraft to date to fly at a supersonic speed and I wonder if there might not be an error here. The Finnish newspaper misspells the name Allam but otherwise the details fit. Googling a bit, I also came across this photo, dated 1957. Ofc it could be a coincidence and there may have been two supersonic instances a year apart, but still. Anyone have any better information or access to the book cited as a reference? --Rallette (talk) 11:29, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]