Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Dowding on July 06, 2008, 11:45:52 AM
-
Made a last minute decision to head to Waddington after I heard the Vulcan had been cleared by the CAA for public display. Fortunately, it paid off - the rain and clouds cleared just in time for the old gals first public display since 1993. The Lancaster and Vulcan flypast was amazing.
Here's some photos I took of the day on my new camera. Only a Sony A200 with 18-70mm lens - not sure how they look on your screens, but they look a touch dark on mine?
Album: http://picasaweb.google.com/paul.stanger/WaddingtonAirshow5July2008 (http://picasaweb.google.com/paul.stanger/WaddingtonAirshow5July2008)
Here's it taking off:
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/paul.stanger/SHDyXOnACXI/AAAAAAAAAQM/oZGnU0WgFhs/liftoff.jpg)
BTW the typhoon has a vulcan gate guard in the background - it is XM 607, the plane which bombed Port Stanley's runway in the Falkland's War.
-
A touch dark, but crystal clear.
That is one evil looking airplane.
-
Yeah, the noise that goes with it really underpinned what it was designed for.
The darkness of the pictures is annoying - how do I rectify it?
-
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0hcQdk9FT2o
Love the gear down pass then climb it did. Looks like they were taking it easy on it tho, not quite the same as the air show routines of old :)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=8wSNxC4PfaY
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=GPuTgcrA2Zs&NR=1
Such a beautiful airplane.
-
The Vulcan is one of the most beautiful aircraft designed.
Fell in love with it when I saw it in the movie Thunderball lol.
-
Wish I could have been there...
WTG Dowding :aok
-
Used to stand on the roof of what was then General Dynamics 30 years ago to watch a Vulcan do airshows here in Fort Worth. Beautiful airplane.:aok Very maneuverable too.
-
Yeah, the noise that goes with it really underpinned what it was designed for.
The darkness of the pictures is annoying - how do I rectify it?
Photoshop
-
No problem, Angus. :D
It was quite emotional really. Was with my dad and brother - brought back memories of many airshows at RAF Finningley as a kid. We used to go practically every year. They even played the display music often used there.
A pretty unforgettable day all round.
Cthulhu - I took the pictures in RAW format and Sony bundle some software which shows all sorts of histograms combined with retouch stuff. Will just have to figure out how they work.
-
Cthulhu - I took the pictures in RAW format and Sony bundle some software which shows all sorts of histograms combined with retouch stuff. Will just have to figure out how they work.
I take all my 35mm photos in RAW format also. I use the bundled software some but generaly use Adobe Lightroom. Much cheaper now than it was when I bought it just last year and I highly reccomend it. It is not necessarily intuative to use but you can get some phenominal results with it.
Shooting RAW always gives me a bluish tinted darker picture until I can go in and reset my white balance on the photo then it does just fine.
Good luck with it.
Mark
-
Not to derail, but I've had terrible results from shooting RAW. Both the camera and the PC software change the picture from what it looked like when I took it (good), to something way different. Even just looking at the file, the thumbnail generation will alter it from the original hue and saturation.
-
Nice shots there, thanks. Looks like it was a really great show.
-
Not to derail, but I've had terrible results from shooting RAW. Both the camera and the PC software change the picture from what it looked like when I took it (good), to something way different. Even just looking at the file, the thumbnail generation will alter it from the original hue and saturation.
I've seen that same problem before m00t. That's why I shoot RAW AND a large jpg with my 40D. That way I have a fall back if the RAW file sux.
-
Send a copy to us Dowding, Sarah does this sort of thing all the time and can post process it for you and send you a few different results.
Our emails should be in the squad emails, if you cannot find them PM me.
<S>
-
Yeah, the noise that goes with it really underpinned what it was designed for.
The darkness of the pictures is annoying - how do I rectify it?
Just out of curiousity, how big is that Vulcan? I've seen pics and models of it, and I cant compare it to a Lancaster since I've never seen that either... :cry
-
If memory serves, its about 100 feet long with a similar wingspan. Truely amazing aircraft - I had the privilege of seeing them display at the RAF Leuchars airshows in the 80's.
If anyone's interested, Vulcan 607 by Rowland White is a great account of the first Vulcan bombing raid on Port Stanley during the Falklands War.
-
If memory serves, its about 100 feet long with a similar wingspan. Truely amazing aircraft - I had the privilege of seeing them display at the RAF Leuchars airshows in the 80's.
If anyone's interested, Vulcan 607 by Rowland White is a great account of the first Vulcan bombing raid on Port Stanley during the Falklands War.
When did the Vulcan get commisioned out of service?
-
When did the Vulcan get commisioned out of service?
Mid eighties - either '84 or '86 I think. Wikipedia would be your friend.
It was a 1950's aircraft built to 1940's specifications. Its role was roughly similar to the contemporary B52 - deliver nukes deep into the heart of Soviet Russia. Along with the Victor and Valiant, it formed Britain's independent nuclear deterrent. However, after the Polaris submarine fleet came online in the 70's, its role was diminished and the aging airframes were starting to show signs of fatigue.
-
If memory serves, its about 100 feet long with a similar wingspan. Truely amazing aircraft - I had the privilege of seeing them display at the RAF Leuchars airshows in the 80's.
If anyone's interested, Vulcan 607 by Rowland White is a great account of the first Vulcan bombing raid on Port Stanley during the Falklands War.
It is a really nice looking plane. The pics with the Vulcan and the Lanc flying in formation are awesome. I'd gladly make them my desktop if they were 1280x1024...
OTOH, the Vulcan raids on Port Stanley was one of the most retarded (read expensive AND useless) ops ever (I'm not criticizing the crews who flew them but the "big brass" behind the planning). Read Sharkey Ward's book "Sea Harrier over the Falkland", it is enlightening...
-
Just out of curiousity, how big is that Vulcan? I've seen pics and models of it, and I cant compare it to a Lancaster since I've never seen that either... :cry
Big!! This should give you an idea on scale. The delta design makes it seem much bigger when you are standing under it too - a really impressive aircraft.
(http://www.aeroplaneart.com.au/Images/JSJ_Avro_Vulcan.jpg)
OTOH, the Vulcan raids on Port Stanley was one of the most retarded (read expensive AND useless) ops ever (I'm not criticizing the crews who flew them but the "big brass" behind the planning). Read Sharkey Ward's book "Sea Harrier over the Falkland", it is enlightening...
What is your justification for that? Being most "expensive and useless"? The main runway at Stanley was cratered, and although it was probably repaired pretty quickly it showed the Argies that the RAF were capable of hitting mainland Agentina if necessary with bombers and 'meant business'. You could compare it to the Doolittle raid, which surely is both 'more expensive' (losing 16 or so aircraft and requiring a CV to steam half way across the Pacific and back just so they can take off) and more 'useless' militarily (not succeeding in really doing much but being a nuisance)?.
-
Doolittle's raid was important because the USA had been on the receiving end for some time and some action was needed to help the morale of the nation (and to show the Japanese that they weren't untouchable).
The Vulcan raids:
- didn't destroy the runway. All bombs but two missed the target. I should say 1.5 bombs hit the runway since the second only clipped it.
(http://www.raf.mod.uk/falklands/images/bb1bombdamage.jpg)
Damage was repaired in 24 hours. IIC, Sharkey Ward didn't agree with the evaluation that the runway was not usable by fast jets after the attack. According to him, the argentines knew that their jets were totally CAPped by the Sea Harriers and didn't want to lose them for nothing.
Damage to the radars were also quickly repaired.
- they used up a lot of tanker resources for this poor results (11 tankers for 2 Vulcans!) while the runway could have been attacked by the Harriers and Sea Harriers of the Task Force (probably with much better results).
- were described as a PR move by the RAF, afraid to be left out of the conflict and facing budget cuts.
Wikipedia info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War#Black_Buck_raids).
Other Wikipedia info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Black_Buck).
-
SD67 - that would be great mate! I'll get them to you somehow - they are big files. <S> :D
It is a really nice looking plane. The pics with the Vulcan and the Lanc flying in formation are awesome. I'd gladly make them my desktop if they were 1280x1024...
DeSelys - I have all the images at 3000+ by 2000+ in JPEG and RAW format. I'll figure out a way to get them on my FTP account and PM you the details if you like.
-
DeSelys - I have all the images at 3000+ by 2000+ in JPEG and RAW format. I'll figure out a way to get them on my FTP account and PM you the details if you like.
Oh yes thanks, I'd appreciate it!
-
Why is there so little glass in the canopy?
-
Why is there so little glass in the canopy?
British people dont need to see... :noid
-
Why is there so little glass in the canopy?
Flash protection from its nuclear payload.
-
Primarily, you had to worry about flash blindness from other people's weapons. We had cool little eyepatches so you'd only go blind in one eye while taking off or landing and we had expensive window shields that plugged in to the window frames for cruise.
-
I always thought the Vulcan's stand-off weapon kicked ass. Designed for use on the trio of V-bombers, the Blue Steel (1.1 Megatons.. :uhoh) seemed most at home hanging under the Vulcan. Inevitably, the missile, and the V-bombers themselves were rendered largely obsolete by Polaris and subsequent SLBM's. The Victor and Valiant were retired after relatively short service lives, leaving the Vulcan, relegated to conventional bombing and tanker duties, to soldier on. I saw the plane and the missile once @ RAF Duxford. Very Cool! :aok
(http://img363.imageshack.us/img363/2863/bluesteelwithvulcanqz8.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)
Flash protection from its nuclear payload.
Yep, same reason the planes were initially painted white overall. Same reason why B-47's and early B-52's were white on the bottom.
It always seemed odd to me that, although the Vulcan was a contemporary of the B-47, the B-52, and, to some extent, the B-58, that it had no tail gun. Especially given the lousy rear visibility.
-
Shoulda thought of that, thanks :)
-
Just out of curiousity, how big is that Vulcan? I've seen pics and models of it, and I cant compare it to a Lancaster since I've never seen that either... :cry
Bloody big. As long as a B-29 but with a shorter wingspan. It could deliver about the same bombload only it could do it far faster and higher. The Vulcan was quite a successful design. The Vulcan was a very important part of NATOs nuclear deterrent.
-
...The Victor and Valiant were retired after relatively short service lives, leaving the Vulcan, relegated to conventional bombing and tanker duties, to soldier on...
The Valiant was indeed retired early - primarily because of wing fatigue. But the Victor went on to become the RAF's in-flight refueling tankers and actually remained in service in that role after the Vulcan was retired - Victor K2 tankers actually server during Desert Storm. The Victor, IMO, was another mean looking aircraft. It was capable of going supersonic in a shallow dive.
The Vulcan, as far as I'm aware, was never used as a tanker. It managed to remain in service as a front line bomber because the strong delta wing made it suitable for the switch to NOE attacks after it became apparent it would have little chance of getting through in a conventional high level attack. The Victor just wouldn't stand up to the stresses involved in NOE flying hence its relegation to the tanker role.
-
The Vulan's last role in the RAF was in fact as a tanker , XH558 was a K2 tanker for a while .
-
Doolittle's raid was important because the USA had been on the receiving end for some time and some action was needed to help the morale of the nation (and to show the Japanese that they weren't untouchable).
The British had their islands invaded - sending bombers from mainland UK to bomb the Falklands sends out a powerful message. It also shows the Argies that mainland Argentina can be hit by RAF bombers.
The Vulcan raids:
- didn't destroy the runway. All bombs but two missed the target. I should say 1.5 bombs hit the runway since the second only clipped it.
(http://www.raf.mod.uk/falklands/images/bb1bombdamage.jpg)
Damage was repaired in 24 hours. IIC, Sharkey Ward didn't agree with the evaluation that the runway was not usable by fast jets after the attack. According to him, the argentines knew that their jets were totally CAPped by the Sea Harriers and didn't want to lose them for nothing.
The Argies admitted that the reason they moved the Mirage III's was initially because of the raid.
Damage to the radars were also quickly repaired.
- they used up a lot of tanker resources for this poor results (11 tankers for 2 Vulcans!) while the runway could have been attacked by the Harriers and Sea Harriers of the Task Force (probably with much better results).
So? Shows the RAF have the power to conduct such long range operations. Harriers/Sea Harriers would put more British lives at risk for the same operation. They could also not hit Argentina which was the message sent by the Vulcan.
- were described as a PR move by the RAF, afraid to be left out of the conflict and facing budget cuts.
The RAF were operating Harrier GR.3's and a Chinook (Bravo November - the rest went to the bottom of the sea) off of the carriers, PR maybe - to show the long range hitting power they can do.
Wikipedia info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War#Black_Buck_raids).
Other Wikipedia info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Black_Buck).
I am not saying that it was the most succesful bombing mission ever, but to use the terms that the raid was one of the most 'retarded' 'useless' and 'expensive' operations in history, is frankly roadkill.
-
It managed to remain in service as a front line bomber because the strong delta wing made it suitable for the switch to NOE attacks after it became apparent it would have little chance of getting through in a conventional high level attack.
No doubt the Vulcan's relatively thick delta wing made the airframe plenty strong for the rigors of NOE flying, but I bet the low wing loading must have made the ride completely miserable for the crew when flying at high speed down low.
-
Nice pics Dowding. :salute
Always liked the VICTOR better myself. Just had a better look about it. :aok
-
I am not saying that it was the most succesful bombing mission ever, but to use the terms that the raid was one of the most 'retarded' 'useless' and 'expensive' operations in history, is frankly bullpoop.
To begin with, Black Buck Vulcans didn't took off from mainland UK but from Ascension Islands. You should read the links I've posted. 2nd, sending bombers from far away is a projection of power indeed, but it was dwarfed by the Task Force (with carrier) sent to the Falklands. I don't think that it was really necessary IMHO.
In fact, it is not my opinion but Sharkey Ward's... Agreed, he didn't use the same terms, but it is well possible that he used even harsher ones (I need to re-read the book)! As the CO of one of the two FAA Sea Harrier squadrons, the political decisions all along the war really hampered the efficiency of his unit and did cause him serious frustration. The lack of trust from the TF CO in the Sea Harrier radar was one of the main causes of the loss of the Sheffield and the troop transport Galahad.
Anyway, Ward was there, he fought over there (shot 3 planes down) and I'll value his opinion above whatever armchair analysts have written (this is
not aimed at you...).
Try to find the book, it is a really good read.
-
To begin with, Black Buck Vulcans didn't took off from mainland UK but from Ascension Islands. You should read the links I've posted. 2nd, sending bombers from far away is a projection of power indeed, but it was dwarfed by the Task Force (with carrier) sent to the Falklands. I don't think that it was really necessary IMHO.
In fact, it is not my opinion but Sharkey Ward's... Agreed, he didn't use the same terms, but it is well possible that he used even harsher ones (I need to re-read the book)! As the CO of one of the two FAA Sea Harrier squadrons, the political decisions all along the war really hampered the efficiency of his unit and did cause him serious frustration. The lack of trust from the TF CO in the Sea Harrier radar was one of the main causes of the loss of the Sheffield and the troop transport Galahad.
Anyway, Ward was there, he fought over there (shot 3 planes down) and I'll value his opinion above whatever armchair analysts have written (this is
not aimed at you...).
Try to find the book, it is a really good read.
On the other hand, the fact the Vulcans could project power that far made the Argies pull some of their front line (Mirage III) aircraft back to defend the mainland and Buenos Aires in particular. If those planes had instead been deployed against the task force's Harriers, its conceivable we could have lost enough to let a Super Etandard through the screen and get an Exocet in on one of the carriers. Thatwould have been game over. The fact the Black Buck raids helped reduce the risk to the task group should not be overlooked.
-
<in imitation New Jersey accent> That's Vulcan Awesome!