Vickers VC10

(

I I

II

(,

I

~/~II.

II

Vickers VC 10 lh lif n r

I

"

(

n

T

I

lh r J (

lh

II

I,

Vickers velD Lance Cole

1)~CI The Crowood Press

First published in 2000 by The CrowooJ Press LtJ Ramsbury, Marlborough Wiltshire N 211R

Dedication

© Lance Cole 2 00

All right, re en·eJ. 10 part of this publication may be reproJuceJ or uansmltteJ in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, incluJing phowcopy, recorJing, or any information storage

For all the VCIO men, the people who designed, built, te ted, flew and ervi ·d the finest aeroplane - the best of British, and the ultimate airliner. Also in memory of Thomas Robert Godden, a gentleman, a flyer and a 10 emhusia t. Fly high into the blue, Grandfather.

Contents

and retrieval ~ystcm, without pcrn1ission in writing

Acknowledgements

from the puhl ishers. British Library ataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue recorJ for this book i; available (rom the British Library. ISB

1861262310

Photograph previous page: A rare view o( a CaleJonianfBUA VCIO in flight - clearly showing the majestic lines of the VCIO

Thanks are due to julian Temple and the staff at Brooklands Museum, including the retired Vickers veterans; Albert Kitchenside, for so mu h help in the archive, searching and identifying of information; jack Ratcliffe and Ted Petty; Mike Goodall, for his help in the photo archives; G.R. 'jock' Bryce for flight-test information; Ken Lawson, for aerodynamics advice; orman Barfield, for his knowledge Dr and papers; Trevor carr at the Duxford Aviation ociety, for access; Peter . Davis, for EAA uper VCI information; Captain Terence Brand, former BOA VC10 commander, for technical, per onal and anecdotal information; David mith ( nr Flight Engineer BOAC/BA), for his recollections; Mike Brokenshire MBE, for his information and help on the RAF VCIO story; Peter Keating; Sir Freddie Laker;

and all the retired staff from Vickers, BOAC, B A and other companies, who all helped so much. Thanks to Brian Trubshaw for checking facts and so kindly agreeing [() write the Foreword. Thanks [() RAF Brize Norton, particularly David Roe, Gary Weightman and Karen Smart. The photographs in this book were sourced from the Brooklands Archive collection, incorporating Vicker /BAC/ BAe/BOA /RAF photo archives, and the Bradley and Brownlow (Brooklands) collection. They are reprinted with kind permission from the Brooklands Museum Trust, to which a donation has been made. The remaining photos are from the author's own collection. Donation have been made [() the Duxford Museum Project and [() the Royal Air Force Benevolent Fund.

Acknowledgements

4

Author's Note

7

For word

8

Introduction

9

1

Vickers and the VC10 - The Company, the Concept and the Politics

13

2

De ign Perspectiv

29

3

A Detailed D scription

43

4

Development and Production

72

5

Flying the V 10 - A Pilot's Per pective

105

6

Into Service with BOAC

112

7

Airline S rvice - Oth r Operators, Africa and Beyond

125

8

Maintaining th Airframe

147

9

Incidents

151

The RAF and the V 10

154

10

Finale

166

Appendix - Complete Fle t List and Details

168

Bibliography

170

Index

171

/

Typefaces useJ: GouJy ([en), Cheltenham (headings) Typeset by Florence Production Ltd, Devon

tooJleigh,

PrinteJ anJ hounJ hI' Bookcraft, Bath

Author's Note Th is i primaril y the story of one aeroplane, but it is a\ 0 the story of the end of an era. The VClO had its roots in the last days of the British Empire and in the first days of the New-World order of the jet age. It was born out of several requirements and from various desigp ideas, which eventually came togethef, through fate and fortune, to create a great aeroplane. That aeroplane turnecL.o6t, through no fault of its own, to mark the end of Britain's dominance of the world airliner market. No other industrial project has ever heen so affected by politics, power games and hidden agendas. 0 other airliner ha been exposed to the effect of opinions,

ignorance and egos in the way that the VClO was. The story of the VClO is both the story of an airliner design amI of an airline world set in an age with changing horizons. It reads like the plot of an Arthur Hailey thriller. Intrigue, politics, design secrets, geo-Iolitical events, the end of an empire, and much more, are the core of the VCIO's life. Even today, the V 10 and its history are misunderstood. Many claim that the VClO should have been developed to make better use of the lengthened runways that came into being. In fact, Vickers had planned to do ju t that. It expan ion of the VC I0 into a larger, more via~ Ie

airframe was curtailed by the customer, yet it is the manufacturer that is too often blamed for failing to develop a rival to the 707 and DC-S variants. This book is an attempt to comhine all the elements of the VC 10 story in a def-initive history of the genius of Vickers design, set amid the politics and corporate history of the day. lours of detailed research have been undertaken, with those who were there when it all happened, those who drew the drawings and calculated the figures, and those who were part of the plot in the other ways. New details and new drawings have been unearthed to contribute further to the unique story of the VC IO.

Lance Cole, Wiltshire, England, 1999

The greatest tail.

7

~ Introduction

Foreword Like too many British products the VClO became immersed in politics and differing attitudes of various chairmen of BOAC. I was intimately involved in the VClO as Chief Test Pilot of Vickers-Armstrongs when I succeeded Jock Bryce, who became the Chief Test Pilot of the British Aircraft Corporation on its foundation in 1960. By this time the VClO was well underway and it was made clear to me that Jock Bryce would still make the first flight with myself as co-pilot. The VC10 order from BOAC was announced in 1958. I recall the very detailed discussions with BOAC and one saw a lot of Captains Cane and Field, under Captain Roy Alderson. All the deficiencies noted on their other jet transports, Comet and Boeing 707, were supposedly eradicated on the VCIO, which was aimed at the Empire routes. By the time the VClO appeared, there was no Empire and the airports to be used had grown long runways. However, the basic requirement of exceptional airfield performance demanded a rear-engined configuration. All the systems were duplicated without much regard to aircraft weight, but as is explained so clearly in his book, BOAC got what they asked for.

Jock Bryce and myself worked very closely on preparations for the first flight, spending many hours on the flying control rig and on learning all the other systems. There was no development simulator in those days. We had to do most things for ourselves including preparing the checklists. One item - air conditioning - had a question mark against it in Jock's mind, so he wrote 'see E.B.T.' (my initials). Unfortunately our handiwork went off to the printers before this was rectified. So there were many laughs on item 5: air conditioning - see EBT. What happened if EBT was not present? A slip of paper cured the problem just before the first flight. There was a general sigh of relief when, after much careful thought, Jock and I recommended to Sir George Edwards and Ernie Marshall that we were happy to make the first flight from Brooklands on its 3,800ft runway, instead of at Wisley which in our view did not offer sufficient advantage to justify the horrendous task of taking th is great monster - Europe's largest aircraft up to that time - by road to Wisley. Brooklands' runway was lengthened by 400ft but because of Lord Brabazon's mon-

ument, the extension was laid at a light angle to the main strip. All VClOs/Super VC10s flew out of Brooklands in this manner, and it seemed rather comical coming round the corner at some 100 knots' The first flight of G-ARTA was made on 29 June 1962 and so started a tremendously interesting and demanding flight development programme, which was not without some major incidents and problems, especially in cruise performance. No story of the VC I0, about which there have been several, has had the unique depth of detail of this book by Lance Cole. The basic theme is a tribute to the work of Sir George Edwards and the late Ernest Marshall. Lance has done this admirably and 1 here commend his work most highly. I am sure that its readers will get as much enjoyment and interest from it as I have done. The VCIO was a beautiful aircraft to fly and it provided a level of comfort that had not been experienced before. I t is a tragedy that its development did not continue, as it had so much to offer. Too many of our best inventions have followed this short-sighted route.

If today, at the end of the twentieth century, a team of engineers and aerodynamicists were asked to shape an airliner for difficult operating environments, certain essential ingredients would be necessary. The airliner could have a swept wing, sculptured shape with an ultra-efficient, uninterrupted, high-lift device-equipped wing. The fuselage could be flush fitting, the wing-box could be smoothed in, and the tail could have plenty of ventral fin area. For maximum aerodynamic effect, tuned to all airfield operating demands and asymmetric handling requirements, the aircraft would almost certainly be aT-tailed, cleanwinged design with rear- or high-mounted engines. In response to such requirements, today's designers might well produce a shape identical to that of the Vickers VCIO. Indeed, when the task of designing just such an aeroplane was set as a theory

question to a group of British aviation experts, they did draw what looked like a VCIO. The giant McDonnell Douglas/ Boeing C-17 Globemaster military transport also utilizes the high-lift, strongbody, T-tailed concept to perform exactly these tasks. It does have its engines on the wings, but those wings are highmounted - a structure that is not widely acceptable in the civil market. The capable Airbus A340 uses a 707 -style layout with podded, underwing engines, but surely that is because it is a derivative design descended from its A300 family of forefathers. Given a clean sheet, Airbus Industrie might well have aped the Caravelle and designed a rear-engined product with a clean wing. Developments in engine thrust and runway length have changed the perspective of design possibilities, making the job of hot and high payload uplifting less of a problem. Yet the fact remains that, in

Brian Trubshaw MVO, CBE, FRAes

British Airways Super VelO shows off the clean lines and elegant stance of the model.

8

9

the context of its time, when hot and high payload uplift and range were designrelated problems, the VC 10 design was the answer. The VCIO was surely a masterpiece of thinking in an age of commercially orientated, conventionally designed airliners and the experts and commentators of the time confirm it. The efficiency of the VC IO's design was reflected in its handling qualities and superior runway performance. It is true that its early-generation engines handicapped its fuel efficiency, but that was within the context of the time and not the fault of the aircraft; indeed, until they were re-engined, its competitors also suffered the same handicap, although they made a worse job of adapting to that handicap. For example, the VCIO could uplift and have range, while the 707 of the time would require an expensive en route refuelling stop that undermined its economics.

INTROD CTIO

-1

A British United VelD cruises through the clouds.

It is perhaps unfortunate that the imply, its capabilities were out tanding. replacement of the VC IO's original Its p
70

upwarus wirh a rouch of rudder. Meanwhile, the 707 pilot would need massive leg forces to keep h is mach ine straight. The VCIO was tailoreu ro a specification unique to its age. The Briti'h Overseas Airways Corporarion was its main operaror, hut many other airlines also used the design to great effect, particularly British Unired, British aledonian and East African A irways. Others included Air Malawi, igeria Aimays, Ghana irways and MEA. The VCI also helped Gulf ir to it position roday as a premier world airline. The facr that the aircraft was manufactured in Britain wa een as an asset and a hallmark of engineering integrity, guaranteeing that the highest standards would be delivered. The Royal Air Force made the most of such attributes by turning its VCIOs inro highly succes ful transport carriers and latterly as tankers. The VC I0 was al 0 fast, e pecially in 'Super' form. This vari;oJnr h;oJd ;oJ srretched

airframe that traded runway performance for range, and the addition of the more powerful Conway 43 engines maue it fast enough to race the sleek Convair jets across the Atlantic. Unlike its rivals, many of which suffered from a cramped cockpit, the V I boasted a Aight deck of paciou proportions, anu the cabin was equally comfortable. The V 10 could usually achieve a mufAed landing unless it was alighting at one of the African airfields such as Kano, igeria, where the aha ran sands and boulders used to batter the fu elage as the thrust rever ers howled. In tailoring the V 10 to meet the requirements, the designers created a machine that was heavier than hindsight and worldwide runway improvements would have deemed nece sary. The V 10 had to handle itself at hot and high airfields at a time when emerging nations could not provide the long smoorh runways that were necessary for a 707 or DC- to get airborne. Ir 31'0 hau to erve the old routes between Britain and Africa and the Orient, and the Commonwealth; ir had to cope with headwinds, inhospitable operating conditions and, often, minimal maintenance facilities. As well as responding to all the e demands, the VC I0 had to perform a task rhar was not in its original remit - it had to compete on the Atlanti routes with rival airliners that were unencumbered by heavy section reinforcement, massive full- pan Aaps and 'Iats, or over-engineered dynamic. Despi te the pol itics of the age and the commercial di tates of the aviation industry, the VCIO met all its targets and then exceeded them. J ts wing de ign advanced the art of aerofoil technique way

beyond the tate of knowledge at that time but in a quiet way that left its true achievement unappreciated by many. Thi was an aircraft that needed no major structural work at those times when its competitors needed repairs and replacements to major 'design life' component. Thi fact was surely financially beneficial, to some extent balancing the VCI 's much-criticized co ts. The VCI 's corrosion-protection system was particularly good; when one of the early Standard model V lOs was broken up after a decade and a half in the humid skie of Africa and Asia, the structure wa corrosion-free amI virtually as new. The system has never been bertered. This aircraft was built around a trong central keel, and over 50 per cent of its part were machined from solid. Thi was the first really big T-tailed structure, involving all the difficultie inherent in mounting a tailplane bigger than a Hawker Hunter's main wing on top of an elegant empennage. The VC 10 al 0 employed a double-redundancy techni al 'ystems concept that took the 'fail- afe' principle a step further. In many ways, the VCIO was also a third-generation jet. Like its V 1000 and Vanjet forebears, it took the art of airliner de ign a step beyond the scope of its competitors; sadly, the VIOOO's lead was wasted by politicians, but much of what Vickers created filtered through to the VCJO. Indeed, the basic VCIO concept was so good that it was pos ible for Vickers to grow the airframe into the Jumbo- and Airbus-type proposals made in the late 1960s. ubsequent developments surely indicate that Vickers, and Brirain, could have dominated commercial airline design for a decade or more, if the visionarie

77

had been alloweu to prevail over the short-termists in the world of politic and power. Even today, the VCIO is considered by some to be inferior to the American designs. Thlre in the antiVC I0 camp always seem to miss the point that the VC 10 was never intended to be a Bri tish 707. The V 10 contributed much to the education of aircraft designers; it· legacy of learning surely touched the developmel,t of Concorde, while its after-life as a Royal Air Force tanker beyond the millennium speaks volumes for it achievement. It maue its mark in civil airline usc, as an R F transport and in a VIP role. When it stopped Aying commercially, tears of I' 'al emotion were shed. To many people, the VCIO, with it, innovative design and its extraordinary life and time, was more than a mere mechanical inanimate object. The affection it inspired is proof that, while it was, in pure commercial terms, a lump of metal like any other airliner, it was also something of a hero, a maje tic symbol of it, age that represented the last 'hurrah' of an era. urely no oth'r four-engined jetliner achieved so much, or pushed the harriers further. The ·tandards set by the VC I were unrivalled until the arrival of oncorde or Boeing's mighty 747. The VC I0 excelled and became a character and an icon of it era - the genius of British de ign at its very be t. After year of being a VC I0 addict and researcher, it has been my privilege to achieve a long-held ambition and present a definitive history of a great airliner maue in Great Britain. This, then, is the story of the V 10.

CHAPTER ONE

Vickers and the VC 10 The CODlpany, the Concept and the Politics It is the view of some, most notably of American aircraft makers, that the Airbu consortium has benefited from an unfair financial advantage through the government subsidies contributed by each partner country. Yet, aeroplane makers have always been subsidized in one way or another - especially in the A. It is true that Airbus is underpinnned by state money (as are many companie in other industrial manufacturing sectors), but there ha , it seems, been a certain amount of corporate amne ia in the aviation world. tate funding, political interference and commercial dealings are as

essential to the V to story as bri II iant design, advanced technique and superb development. In the U ,Boeing's mighty 707 took its cue, in design and development terms, from the vast expansion of technique and supply brought about by the Second World War and the old War. Military contracts kept the bank manager happy. In Britain in the early 195 s, the scenario was the ame - albeit on a far smaller scale - with the great aircraft maker producing both military and civil aircraft. ome focused on ingle theme, while others spread their net to encompa s both worlds.

East African Airways was a major customer for the VC10.

Going up! BOAC VC10 roars up into the climb-out in a classic VC10 memory.

13

Military to Civil Vickers, aircraft maker and shipbuilder, was perhap the perfect example of the cross-fertilization and cross- osting that is pos ible when a company plans an aircraft to serve both the military and civil markets. The Viscount propliner and the Valiant bomber exemplify the ompany's abi Iity to de ign and serve wi th excellence in diverse arenas - something, indeed, that Vicker had done since its early days. The quality of the company i surely underlined ~ y the fact that it entered the world of commercial-airline airframes in

'"

10 - THE COMPA Y. TH

Vl000 - A Loss of Historical Proportions The Boeing 747 was a triumph. It was, and remains, an aircraft that changed the world and created history, The excellence of its achievement cannot be denied, The 747 was born out of a requirement, and of the massive resources of the one company whose history led it at its appointed time to be the creator of a great aeroplane, To many, the circumstances of the birth of the 747 were uniquely of their time. Certainly, Boeing risked all on the 747, Yet the company knew it was on the right track, Today, few remember that there was another time in history when a great aeroplane - which broke new ground in its size, construction and capabilities - was produced at some risk, In its own way, no less significantly than the 747, that aeroplane, the Vickers V1000, could have changed the world too. Bigger than the Comet, with greater dimensions and a stronger structure, the Vl000 was a long-haul jetliner with real north Atlantic capabilities. It was also an aircraft with diverse route-operating performance and economics, and with true ability, The V1000 brought new techniques and new standards to the airline world before the 707 emerged, Like the 707, the V1000 had its roots in a military concept that was instigated in response to national, military and trooping requirements in a transport command role. Yet the airframe that was produced could easily be modified into a superb, class-leading civil airliner, Thus the V1000 could have been both a military transport and, slightly modified, an airliner; with more significant modifications, the V1000 became the VC7 variant, reflecting the genius and achievement of the British aircraft industry. Sadly, the V1000 never took to the air. It ended its life as a 90 per cent finished airframe that had its purpose and potential guillotined shortly before its first flight. With the cancellation of the V1000, British politicians ended Britain's chance to lead the world, and Vickers was left on the brink of a major triumph, The potential victory was turned into defeat. Incredibly, the potential for orders worth millions of pounds, and thousands of British

jobs, was lost through the government's short-term outlook that ended the V1000's military role. It lacked the foresight to continue a small amount of funding for the V1000 and therefore take the world airliner market by storm. Aviation history records that the V1000 was stillborn, but the amount of work that went into creating the aircraft has not been unearthed. The archives and retired Vickers veterans are able to supply a fascinating insight into the story, and Ernest Marshall's paper on the Type 1000, found deep in the hundreds of archived Vickers files, is particularly interesting. The V1000 (alongside the Vanjet) is integral to the VC10 story and its design and development underline the brilliance of Vickers. Part of a relationship between Vickers and the Royal Air Force, work started on the V1000 in the Vickers Project Office in May 1951. E.E. Marshall and George Edwards worked to a performance brief from Air Commodore Tuttle (later to head BAC) and then, for civil use, to a brief from BOAC's Messrs Whitney Straight and Campbell Orde. From then, until the advisory design conference in October 1952, five basic type projects were submitted to the Ministry of Supply, whose military transport requirements were behind the work. Vickers created 'bluebooks', or design folders, for each of their ideas, labelled 'Bluebook 97943/98545/99842/A256/A1434/A3272/A4820'. The early studies culminated in 1953, with B1238. As early as Oecember 1952, Vickers had 45 draughtsmen working on the Type 1000, and the number would soon increase. Vickers records show that the company was short on draughtsmen for the project and in June 1953, when 135 men were due to be working on Type 1000, only 64 men were engaged. These figures reflect the size of the project - such work had never been attempted before - and the problem soon had to be addressed. Initially, the aircraft proposed for the Ministry of Supply transport/trooping role was a derivative of the Valiant bomber. Bluebook 97948, also seen as Type 660, featured internal fuselage changes, but many basic airframe carry-overs, With a 3ft extension to the fuselage forward of the wing, this

The original Vl000 plans.

(Right) This Vl000 model might look like a Comet but note the curved and swept fin and tailplane as well as the more advanced wing.

was essentially a converted B.104 Valiant type, Two versions were envisaged: Normal, with a 2100nm range, 126,500lb take-off weight and 469 knots cruise speed, and Long-Range, with 3650nm range, 155,7001b take-off weight and 464 knots cruise speed, Both would have cruised well above 40,OOOft. Four Conway engines were envisaged, With the expansion of the concept into Bluebook 98545, the Valiant's wing was moved from a high to a low position, but the basic Valiant fuselage tooling and wing shape were retained. Ninety troops could be carried in a reconfigured internal cabin, For the first time, Olympus engines were mooted as an option, By now, take-off weight was 175,OOOlb and the range was 4580nm with a near 30,OOOlb max payload. Fully loaded with troops and their kit, this version could range 3460 nautical miles, and represented the beginning of the Type 1000. At this stage, in 1952, the contract role and

The Vl000 - the airliner that never was, whose cancellation cost Britain much,

74

75

CONCEPT AND THE POLITICS

\ VI KERS AND THE VCID - THE COMPANY. THE

ONCEPT AND THE POLITI

VICKERS AND THE VelD - THE

May 1955: the Vl000 cockpit takes shape.

VI 000 forward fuselage under construction at Wisley in early 1955. Note the windscreen shapes and angle of the nose - more VC10 than Comet-like.

76

civilian role of the V1000 intercontinental troopship became very attractive to BOAC. The airline's Chief Engineer Mr Dykes and Operations Development Manager Mr Jackson joined in with the proposal work, after a degree of soul-searching. Despite his advanced thinking, even George Edwards was concerned about the magnitude of the task of designing and supporting an aircraft of the V1000's size. He warned that the existing design - basically the Valiant conversion - might well fill the Ministry of Supply RAF transport role for six such aircraft, but that it could not possibly begin to fill the civil role that was an obvious spin-off. Given the massive development costs, any firm proceeding with such a large and revolutionary aircraft had to secure the basis of a firm order. George Edwards considered that the logical approach would be to produce the military transport version to standards that would fulfil the civil need. Vickers also pointed out that by growing the original RAF design into a civil airliner, the resulting efficiency improvements would filter back down to the basic military variant and improve it beyond the design parameters with which it started out - for minimal penalty. There were, however, areas that needed separate development the military version needed an integral cargo lift, for example, while the weight issue was paramount for the civil version, which would not need a

structure that could carry redundant features not carried over from the RAF variant. Bluebook 99842 of December 1951 contained the first considerations for a combined civil and military airframe that could fulfil two or more roles. Here for the first time, in 1951, was the idea for a six-abreast passenger cabin, years before the 707 was widened to seat six across. Of course, the Valiant fuselage had to be thrown out, and a new 12ft fuselage incorporated. BOAC also wanted changes to the Vickers cockpit seating layout - requiring more time and expense. At the same time, the wing was increased in size at the root, moving the engines further away from the cabin. This improved the take-off lift performance and added 5ft to the usable cabin length by moving the noise footprint, or cone, further aft. The aircraft was stressed to 175,000Ib in clean form with 190,0001b on offer with slipper tanks. Conway engines could uplift 120 troops or 80 First Class passengers for 4460 nautical miles. Developed from the Valiant, these types featured the Valiant wing tooling and root-mounted engines with a Valiant fin and tail. As the design grew, and there was a need for bigger engines, Vickers knew that the wing structure would have to be developed to carry those larger engines, and to handle greater wing sweep for higher mach number cruising. A change in

77

VICKERS A 'D THE VCIO - THE COMPANY. THE CONCEPT AND THE P LlTIC

tail design was also needed. Such developments were visualized in the Bluebook A256 of May 1952 - the beginning of the Vl000 type - and a version was started in the Vickers Armstrong drawing office in July 1952. The payload remained at 120 troops/30,OOOlb over a 2,100 stage length with a 2,OOO-yard take-off run with water injection. Subsequent Bluebook models were based on this design, but incorporated refinements in structural and aerodynamic design. By now, although retaining some Valiant features, the Vl000 had a low-set tail, elegant curved wings, a long thin body and swept tail planes with curved tips - later seen in the VClO. As with the forthcoming Vanguard, the machining of the Valiant-derived V1000 benefited from solid milling techniques for part of its structure. It also featured an underbody fairing to hide the undercarriage and turn the belly design into a more efficient shape. Large flaps and a split, under-fuselage ventral flap panel also appeared. Saunders Roe had also tank-tested a scale model of the Vl000 type and found that it suffered from a diving tendency. This was cured by tweaking various panels and by the novel approach of using the nose gear bay doors as an angled hydroplane for ditching emergencies. The cockpit-window design also set a Vickers design motif that was later seen in the VC10. Despite having no knowledge of the problems that would manifest themselves in the Comet's fuselage, the Vl000's designers included thick, strong, doubled-up load paths and panels in the aircraft's pressurized fuselage. The windows, although large, were quite widely spaced in a high-density seating configuration. Thus, the Vickers hull was reputedly stronger than the contemporary standards. The first definitive advisory design conference took place on 20 October 1952. The specification C.123D was written, and subsequent type reviews beginning with A/3272 were worked in to the parameters. In late 1954, Edwards and Stephenson reviewed the weight of the type, and instigated a slimming-down process; the technical office trimmed wing and tailplane weight. Weight increase and engine performance had become crucial in trying to get the Type 1000 design to serve both military and civil masters;

1947 (previous Vicker aircraft for civil use had been ba ed on military Vickers types), yet by the early 1950s had conquered the A with the Viscount, and had created the sol id and dependable Vanguard. A team of talented designers and engineers was at the core of these achievements, representing the genius and foresight of a company led by men of strength of purpo e and vision, uch as Sir George Edwards and Ernest Marshall. They were the spirit of Vickers, and of all that wa the best of British. Within just a decade, Vicker had progressed from the design and manufacture of military aircraft to the creation of the Viscount, the V I000 and the VC I0; it was a significant achievement. It was Vickers, based at Brooklands, at Weybridge in Surrey, in southern England, that built the Vi my bom~er the fir t big airframe to make it across the Atlantic Ocean. It was also Vickers that used Barnes Wall i ' revolutionary geodetic fuselage monocoque tructure for the Wellington bomber. Vickers knew all about big, strong tructures long before the

VICKERS AND THE VCIO - THE COMPA Y. THE CONCEPT A D THE POLITICS

this growth potential led on from the Valiant-sourced airframe conversion that was the Type 660, to the Type 1000 and the proposed VC7 variant. On 22 September 1954, the first design progress meeting was held. Some 6,700 drawings had been created and a first-flight date was seen as likely to be between December 1955 and March 1956. A second design progress meeting in January 1955 saw the setting of the first-flight date, and much work in progress on fabricating the design. A service entry in 1959/60 was envisaged, as was the use of reheat on the engines. An idea to use six de-rated engines was dropped and Rolls-Royce was on hand to discuss increasing the Conways' thrust. Further refinements referred to boundary layer control wings and aileron droop at take-off to help the hot and high performance figures. By this time it became obvious that the Vl000 was far more capable than the Comet and had a wing that was 15 per cent bigger. The workforce was expanded and the factory set about producing the largest, most advanced jet airline transport airframe ever seen. The Type 1000 and its later VC7 variant were seen as a huge leap forvvard, with the potential to sell in their hundreds to all the world's leading airlines, not just in the Commonwealth. This was an aircraft that could have mastered 85 per cent of all westbound winter winds on the Europe to New York run and could have performed well in payload and range needs on the Empire or tropical roots. Only engine restrictions could have limited its potential and its early entry into the long-range jet market. Offering up to 120 seats and high-speed, high-altitude cruising before the 707 and DC-8 stole the market, V1000 would surely have put Britain, and Vickers Armstrongs, in the ascendant in the New World. Sadly, with the first V1000 90 per cent finished, and the first flight only months away, the project was scuppered by the politicians and the course of British industrial and aviation history was damaged beyond repair. Despite the VC10 and Concorde, British aerospace manufacturing never recovered from this terrible situation, and Britain's role as an aircraftbuilding nation was changed for ever.

V I and would ne"er have built a lightweight machine, no matter how -leek, if it had compromised structural integrity for speed. From its first monoplane in 1911, and its creation of a family of aircraft such as the Gunbus, FBI4 and Boxkite, from 1917 to 1923, Vickers' large air raft division has a clear lineage. From Vimy to Victoria, from Viking to Viscount and Vanguard, the Vickers commercial aircraft project number I - hence 'VC I0' - was the last and greatest of the family.

VIOOO and the Vanjet While Vickers was making the Viscount and Valiant, De Havilland was stealing a march on the world with the Comet, and Boeing and Douglas were racing to the jet age with their respective aircraft. Disasters involving the Comet handed the jet age on a plate to the Boeing 707 and the DC; meanwhile, the Vicker VIOOO project, which was nearly complete, wa cancelled. This aircraft was in part a forerunner to the VCIO, and was surely the great

78

wasted hope of British civil aviation in the 1950s. o amount of hindsight can change history, but Vickers did learn its lessons from the cancelled VI 000 project, and would go on to use what it had learned. However, the V 1000, although part of the VC 1O's origins, is not the whole story, despite what history seems to have recorded. Many historians a knowledge that the VIOOO was advanced for its time, but few know the story behind the progre s that took the Viscount beyond the prop age, and turned it into a highly advanced jet design. That development process, and the various protoypes that evolved from it, are the true origi ns of the VC I O. Buried deep in the archives of Vickers are the detail and drawings of the other great abandoned airframe of the 1950sthe Vanjet. They are shown here for the first time. The Vanjet was a jet ver ion of the Vanguard and Viscount; in terms of its design, it pre-dated the Iike of the D -9 and the 737 by years. Incredibly, its ultimate version featured two rear engines mounted on stub wings, and a third engine

The purity of the Vickers design is well displayed in this shot of a BOAC Super VC10 seen from above on the runway roll.

buried in the rear fu elage. Its air supply wa fed via a central intake at the base of the leading edge of the fin - just like that of the Trident and the 727, which came almost a decade later. Interestingly, the Vanjet's in-house Vickers project code was VC IO! (By this time, all Vickers aircraft were given names, while 'VC' referred to commercial projects, as in Vickers ommercial.) The Vanjet drawings are clearly labelled 'V 10', becaus , at that stage, the Vanjet was Vickers' tenth idea for a commercial project. After various incarnations, with various detail design changes, the Vanjet project died, to be reborn as the four-engined VCIO, with additional input from the VI{)OO experience. If Vickers had con-

tinued the naming theme, the VCIO would have had a name, not a VC code number. (Those who were there at it conception confirm that the later, socalled V II, or short-haul V 10, actually had its root in the Vanjet origins of the later VCIO itself despite its re-incarnation as a 1960s marketing exercise.) The V J 000 started life a a military transport aircraft built to a combined Royal Air Force/Ministry of Supply request. After the cancellation of the project, it ended its life as an almost complete, but stillborn pile of castings and toolings for six example of an airframe that involved great advanc s in aviation de ign. Inherent in its design was a civil derivativ , which would have taken the

79

airline world by storm, and would surely have left the 707 trailing in its wake. This deri Vali ve, known as the V 7, came later. The VI 000 had a maximum all-up weight of 225,000Ib (102,000kg). With its airframe's capability to grow even further, it was a sure and certain future for the British airliner industry, not just a military transport project. The V I 000/VC7 was a truly oceanic non-stop airliner at a time when the 707 and the Comet were not - a fact often forgotten by aviation commentator. Even against winter winds on the we tbound London- ew York run, the VIOOO, with its bigger wing area and greater tankage, would have made it across in one hop. At that time, th 707 could not, and only later became truly capable

VICKERS AND THE VCID - TIlE COMPANY. THE CONCEPT A D THE POLITICS

the superb Caravelle, most designers leant towards underwing engine pods, and conventional wings and tails with minimal high-lift equipment - with r suiting spe d increases for the slow-speed section of landing. The early 707s had no slats and only later gr w crude swing-out, interrupted, leading-edge fence-type panels. The DC- went without any leading-edge devices at all, as had the Comet. The VClO bucked these trend. Longer range also became an i sue; fuel tankage space within the airframe of any airliner was at a premium. Cabin spa e was also an area of confusion. Until the mid-1950s, almost all air travel had been a luxury for the privileged only. Even 'second class' seats were widely spaced, at a 36 to 39in pitch, with footrests and clip-on eating tables, and separate bathrooms and lounges were also provided. Only a few of the stretched piston-turbine types featured close-coupled 'Economy'

cabins, and these were mostly used for holiday flights. Long-haul and transatlantic travel were still the preserve of the wealthy and the aircraft cabin configurations reflected that. After the 707 and DC-8 brought in tightly spaced seats at 34in (or less) pitch, the familiar cramped Economy cia was born. When the VC 10 was introdu ed into this hanging world, its purpo e was to reverse certain trends and improve upon other. These aspects of its development are often forgotten by those who focus more on the financial implications.

Intrigue and Contradiction Airlines were in a quandary in this changing world of aircraft development. Fi rst, they were orderi ng state-of-the-art big-prop airliner, then they wanted the speed of the prop turbines, and then the e

.

The style of the Speedbird emblem and the T tail.

on the oceanic route. uch fact underline just how advanced the VIOOO theme was in the 1950s.

A World of Change At the same time as the V 1000 project wa going on, the Comet story wa unfolding, and changes in the airline world were racing ahead against a background of paradox and contradiction. The omet was all-n w, but it faults were blamed on the single factor of a lack of knowledge; in fact, although the Comet project tragi ally ost the live of many, it actually ended up indirectly saving the

lives of many, many more. Much was learned from it lesson, not least by the American designers and manufacturers. As well as the variou design considerations and commercial desires, the 1950s also witnessed the change from prop power to pure jet power, via the prop turbine and tw aked airframes that wer the Bristol Britannia, Lockheed EI ctra and the stretched Lockh ed Super onstellation and DC-? even Seas aircraft. So, prevailing trends were altering all the time. At this time, BOAC was arguing that prop power was the future of Atlantic air travel; BOA then decided the supposedly uneconomic jet would be viewed as the certain future for long-haul

20

routes, and not ju t reserved for short-haul route., as had been argued previously. ertain trends were, however, more obvious. Every new jet-airliner proposal at that time brought a rise in landing speeds and a more difficult take-off rotation technique. Ther were several fatal accidents, and the aviation authorities began to voice concern about the increases in approach speeds. Similarly, the previous trend of burying engines in the wing roots had been found to have a number of sa~ ty-related problems; new, thinner wing design al 0 meant that burying engines in the wing root contributed to aerofoil difficulties. With the exception of those working on

The first true, four-engined VelD, shown in a rare airbrushed Vickers design bureau drawing of 1956 by Barry Jones. Of note are the curved Kuchemann-style wingtips, shared engine pod intakes and fin-top design.

21

aircraft were overtaken by the arrival of the jets. A rguments raged over the economics of jet operations for some time. Britain's B A was a major player, but their part was made worse by the Comet disasters and the delayed arrival (due to engine problem) of the otherwise brilliant Bristol Britannia. If this wasn't enough, the ugly world of politics also played its part, as governments with differing opinions argued about which aircraft to buy. In addition, a civil/military design requirement for a hared airframe project meant that the birth of the Vickers VCW was fraught with intrigue and contradiction long before its conception. The fact that such a superb product emerged from such a mess is a tribute to the talents of the design team, whose genius won through. A paper in the Vickers archives at Brookland, written by Dr Norman Barfield, the man who spent a lifetime

VICKERS AND THE VCIO - THE COMPANY. THE CONCEPT AND THE POLITICS

Y. THE CONCEPT AI D THE POLITICS

developing commercial aircraft perspective for Vicker, records the twists amI turns of the V LO story: May 1957 - Order (or 35 VCI s announced for Oper
bility o( development to serve the needs of the orth AtlantIc market.

0

government finance

involved (or development o( the aircraft. January 1958 - Contract signed (or 35 VClOs plus optIons on (urther 20. June 1960 - The contract is amended and signed for I

Super VCIOs in addition to the

tandard VCIO order. 'uper VCIO to be a 212seatef. June 1961 - BOAC says the Super VCIO is

too hig and cuts it to 163-seat version. January 1962 -

'on tract reduced to 12

Standard VCIOs with compensation per lo,t aircraft order paid to Vickers (as BAC). February 1962 - Puhlic concerns over size of the VC I0 order; pre", comment. June 1962 - ReqUirement for longer-range VCIO dlScimed. BOAC suggests that if VIckers (BAC) cannor meet target", the order mal' "uffer. J'lOuMy 1964 - Sir Gdes Guthrie takes over

Vickers: The Company and Its Historical Roots The Vickers company has its roots in the heady days of British aviation just prior to the outbreak of the First World War. The first aviation-type project was an airship named Mayfly commissioned by the Royal Navy from the Vickers shipbuilding company. Although having no airship experience, Vickers was able to realize a prototype, which, sadly, met its end in bad weather conditions. The Vickers Ltd aviation department was formed in 1911, and based in London and Kent, separate from Vickers/Maxim, the ship and arms manufacturer. This aviation department produced the first Vickers experimental type aircraft - the REP or number one monoplane, which took to the air in 1911. It was designed by Messrs Flanders, Low, Challenger, and its pilot, Mr Macdonald. In 1915, after reorganization under General Manager Major Herbert F. Wood, and under the engineering stewardship of Harold Barnell, the Vickers (aircraft) company moved to premises at Brooklands, near Weybridge in Surrey. There, the company had moved into the former Itala car works factory and had set up a flying school. The Admiralty-commissioned experimental fighting biplane, or EFB, equipped with Maxim guns, began to take shape at Brooklands alongside various types for other manufacturers. With Rex Pierson (still only in his late twenties, and not yet famous) as designer, the company pursued the chance of orders for military aircraft. At the time, such marketing was controlled for the government through the British Air Board, or BAB. Herbert Wood, Rex Pierson and Peter Dyke Acland, Wood's chief assistant, created the aircraft that were the core of the Vickers airframes that were later produced in large numbers. Their work, and the prototype EFB-27 fighter bomber, led to the evolution of the legendary VimI', the first really big airframe for military use, which

flew in late 1917. This very capable aircraft could stay aloft for eleven hours and carry a 5,0001b load within its 12,5001b all-up weight. No other aircraft, not even any from the Handley Page company, could match the Vimy's range, weight and strength. A Vi my made Alcock and Brown famous for crossing the Atlantic, and carried the wings of the Empire in the 1920s. It was the VimI' that made Vickers, with government orders for over 200 airframes giving the company a secure future. In the inter-war years, after the death of Herbert Wood, and with A. Knight as Chief Engineer and P. Maxwell Muller as General Manager, Vickers carved its niche and the VimI' became a commercial transport as well as a bomber. It was even sold to the Chinese in 1920; a Chinese-registered Weybridge-built VimI' flew an airmail service between Peking and Tsinsna in July 1921! Vickers aircraft supported the exploration of the air and allowed pilots such as Smith and Van Rynewelt to pioneer overseas routes and to set numerous records. Vickers, and the combination of Vickers-Saunders, also saw the development of the amphibious flying boat - in 1920, they came up with the 450h.p. Viking flying boat, with a plywood hull and unique, forward-folding wheels. In 1928, Vickers Aviation Ltd came into being, more than just a department of Vickers Ltd. It took over the Supermarine company, but kept that company's name. In 1938, the parent Vickers group was part of a merger, and Vickers Armstrongs was established, which then absorbed Vickers Aviation. In 1955, the all-encompassing Vickers Armstrongs Ltd was formed, and the Supermarine name disappeared.

as ChaJrlnan of BOAC. April 1964 to July 1964 - Guthrie pial" reorgat11:atlon of BOAC and Government Select Committee puhltshes report on nationalt:ed BOAC. Guthne propose" BOAC route change and cancellation of entire Super VC I0 order with 7 7" to replace them. The government refuses to accept thIS and orders BOAC to take the VCIO. 1 aircraft made over ro the RAF VC I0 order and in March 1966 the optiOn> for further Super VCIO" cancelled with BOAC p;lying mdlion> in cancellation charge".

VICKERS VC 10 MK.IV GENERAL ARRANGEMENT FIG.I

An airbrushed early design rendering of the VelD. Note the fin fairing shape and engine intakes - both subsequently changed for production.

22

Such was the talc of the VClO's infancy - affected as it was by the stewardship of BOAC and by the meddling of politicans. Caught up in all this, Vickers must have felt enormou frustration; even today, former Vickers employees have strong views on the situation. The fact that a Select Committee of the House of om mons was asked to look at the whole proce s, and to focus directly on the BAC/BOA /VCtO story, indicates the extent of the mess. History reveals that there was confusion over BOAC' exact role - was it to be an airline intent solely on making a profit, with carte blanche to buy what it wanted, wherever it wanted, or was it a national flag carrier with a duty to support it own country's products (and still make a profit)? Certainly, these questions were upp rmost in the minds of those

,

ers aircraft had Africa in their blood. This is a Viking of Central African Airways.

23

The Vimy, in the form of the airframes that it spawned, played a part in the creation of the greatest names in Vickers history, like the Vernon and the Victoria. These in turn led to the Barnes Wallis-designed Wellesley and the B.9/32 twin-engined airframe that became the Wellington, which gave birth to civilian offspring such as the Viking and the Varsity. In the 1930s, Vickers aircraft set many world records for long-distance flights, as well as the world height record - on 16 September 1932, a Pierson-designed Vickers Vespa Mk4 flew to 43,976ft with oxygen-equipped Cyril Uwins as pilot. These successes reflect the skills and knowledge of Rex Pierson, who dominated his field up to and beyond the merger that created Vickers Armstrong and saw the birth of the Viscount for the Brabazon Committee and for the nation. Under his tutelage, the company produced nearly 40 major, standard-setting aircraft designs. Without those

who ran BOAC at the time; departing BOAC Chairman Sir Miles Thomas was the first to comment on the national-carrier role, and to ask whether BOAC was an airline or a vehicle for national selfinterest. Thomas' successor was Sir Gerald d'Erianger. I-laving run BEA, he was at least an airline man, yet hi role was a difficult one, alongside ir Basil mallpiece as BOA Managing Director. The Aviation Minister at the time was Harold Watkinson, who indicated that BOA could have its Boeing, while hi government seemed to be pushing for the purchase of a British aircraft only. These mixed messages within government panned several elections and several ministers - up to and including Julian Amery's time in the Aviation Ministry. Throughout all this, BO C had the almo t impossible job of coping with a situation that et the needs of politics and management in conflict. The British home airline market was small, and this meant that only limited orders for any airframe would be made. The home aviation manufacturers, however, needed greater numbers in order to make a profitable production run. Between 1956 and 1961, this dichotomy was at the core of the problem. Although it could hardly be blamed on BOAC, many tried to lay responsibility for the situation at BOA's door. It became obvious that the VCIO, which had not been intended for use on the orth Atlantic routes, would in fact be able to serve them and that it was, indeed, going to be used on them by BOA . However, by this time, the whole affair had been affected by interference from all quarters. It certainly seems unfair that BOA should have complained about the design of the aircraft when it had always been intended for another use - for which BOAC had speCified in the first place '

who taught Pierson and those whom he taught, the story of Vickers and the VC10 would surely not be as it is. It is perhaps a cruel irony that, in its eagerness to become part of the TSR.2 story, and to further its overall plans, Vickers allowed itself to become part of the new British Aircraft Corporation. It then witnessed the abandonment of the TSR.2, and also saw the superbly advanced fighter-bomber and civil-airframe designs, which had been readied by the company, be submerged by the plans of others. One example was the BAC One-Eleven, a Hunting aircraft design, which usurped an in-house Vickers plan for a shorthaul airbus-type airliner when the BAC group was created. This perhaps exemplifies what Vickers lost through the merger - the airbus type was to come to the fore later in various incarnations.

By the time ir Matthew Slattery had become BOAC Chairman, the affair had gone badly awry. He uggested that the airline needed a 707 rival of equally tailored design for a specific Atlantic route, but his proposal went against the decisions already taken by politicians and by BOAC itself. A lattery tried to do his job in protecting BOAC's accounts, the perennial question about BOAC's exact role arose again - wa it a commercial entity, operating totally independently, or a commercial entity with a duty to support home products, and what of the need to make a profit as well? There seemed to be no answer to the questions, the government changed, and the machination began to affect Vickers' work on the aircraft, and the VClO's delivery schedule. A number of statements were made about the disastrous ituation, most notably in the House of om mons. By late 1963, Julian Amery, the new Minister for Aviation, seemed to agree to BOAC running the airline for profit only. However, he al 0 stated that the decision about whether to use home-grown airliners or off-the-shelf Boeings would be up to BOAC, but that it was clearly allied to home political needs. Was this cane blanche to BOAC' new Chairman ir Giles Guthrie (an ex-banker) to run BOAC solely for profit, irrespective of a role in supporting the Empire and Commonwealth air routes with an aeroplane designed to do just that (which the airline had itself requested) I Guthrie took a commercial decision to do just that, and was much criticized for doing so. Was he imply doing his job, or was he forgetting BOAC's historical role and responsibilities, which had originally led it to ask Vicker to de ign an airliner to meet wideranging requirements? Amazingly, the outgoing B AC Chairman had been asked by

24

VICKERS TYPE /,000

REPORT N~

~t""Scale Model (M12 5),

Bg.2 .

GENERAL

T/o/14 5 r

I

These views of the Vl000 scale model for ditching trial show its true shape - less Comet and more A340!

,

strange set of contradictions. ubsequently, the situation changed and numbers were reduced. It is worth remembering that all the design and development wa privately funded by Vickers, while BOA was a nationalized entity that was recapitalized with government (or taxpayers') money. This funding included an indirect, I ut very real, subsidy effect for placing the BOA long-haul jet order at home in Britain, according to government wishes. Sir Giles Guthrie, BOAC Chairman from 1964, did his job in fighting for BOAC's financial honour. However, the airline's original role toward the aircraft it needed seems to have changed to the po ition later adopted by Guthrie. Whatever happened, he and BOAC would not, or could not, lose - the airliner they asked for was delivered. Furthermore, the market for the aircraft, and the passengers to fill it, were there, despite BOAC's financial losses in 1959. Many of these had been related to late aircraft del iveries, to a confused management view of whi h propulsion and capacity choice to make, and to the costs inherent in a diverse and multi-fleet operation.

VIEWS.

the incoming Chairman not to order uper VC I for BOAC, yet Guthrie found that, via the Amery-guided plan, this had already happened. Guthrie wanted to cancel the VCI order entirely and go for an all-707 fleet (curiously, in luding 707 freighters - the VCIO freighter having been turned down by BOAC!) - doing much harm to the VCIO's chances. Comments in Norman Barfield's overview paper indicate that BOAC might have been allowed to order 707 if it had undertaken to order British aircraft in the future. BOAC was claiming that, even if it did this, and procured both sets of airl iners, it would still not have enough aircraft. Yet, when BOA came to negotiating with its own national aviation industry, all sorts of counter claims were made, including one that said that Vickers had demand d an order for 35 aircraft. Dr Barfield' notes confirm that a figure of 5 was mentioned in discussion by BOA ,but he relies on Sir George Edwards (Vickers Director) to refute this, stating that, in Edwards view, 'There was not the positive tand by us that we would make the aeroplane for a quantity of less than 35.' Vickers cont nds that there was no 'ultimatum' to BOAC, and that 35 was a flexible discussion figure put forward by BOAC itself. BOAC's traffic plan analy is for the future years actually stated that 35 aircraft were needed, with a potential expansion to another 27 on top of the 35. This was without mentioning the growth in freight traffic that the airline anticipated (which led to the freighter VClO ideas from Vickers). The argument over numbers raged on. BOAC claimed that it had been forced into taking too many VClOs, yet it renegotiated the original contract in 1961 to increase that number, and its own traffic predictions confirmed the increased number of aircraft required. It was a

a

Post-War Needs In the post-war days of the early 1950s, when the VI 000 was at its height and the VCIO had yet to evolve, Britain still had an empire and a massive military presence around the globe. These outposts needed servi e in military and civilian terms and there was a certa in market for an aircraft to do this. This sector of the market even had its own label - MRE, standing for 'Medium-Range Emrire' - while the routes to the Far East were known as the 'Dragon Routes'. Thus it was that Vickers rmstrongs Limited, working on an idea for meeting the Empire's need, actuall y created a world-class ai 1'1 incl'. s early as 195 ,the V 1000 project had been drawn up around the remit of the Royal Air Force's transport and supply needs. At the same time, the civil medium-range Vanjet project was also intended to meet the RAF's transport need. The Ministry of upply issued a

25

VICKERS A D THE VCID - THE COMPANY. TilE CONCEPT AND THE POLITIC

specification for such a machine. At the same time, Vickers wa already doing initial design work on an even larger VIOOO derivative aircraft for the civil market, known as the VC7 project. Over the next five years, Vicker spent a ignificant amount of money on the VlOOO/V 7 and, with joint RAF and BOAC input, it looked as though the two projects coming from one basic airframe would defray co ts and allow clear figure to be firmed up in performance terms. This had happened on the Boeing KC135/707 project. There were clear contradictions in this apparently good idea. The RAF needed an aeroplane for medium-length supply sectors, mostly in 'hot and high' tropical places. It needed to be strong and, while they did not want it to be exactly slow, it had above all to be tough. They did not need a swift, lightweight, first cia arrow to champion the British Blue Riband in the skie. BOAC, on the other hand, needed just that - a transatlantic pure jet designed for the highly profitable routes to the USA and Canada. These countries were still seen in tho e days rather quaintly a part of the 'New World', but they were known to be a profit centre of growing trength - a vital arena for any airline that wished to be taken seriously. Despite the obvious contradictions, BOAC was keen to get on board with the project; perhaps the fact that million of pounds had been 10 t on the development of the Britannia still smarted in the accountants' faces. Also affecting this situation were the past machinations of the Brabazon committee, and its themes for 'streaming' what aircraft were needed and who was to bu iId them; in addition, the Brabazon airliner was in its death throes and the aunder Roe 'Prince's' flying hoat project had recently failed. The aero-political situation in the early 1950s was in a stare of confusion, with too many loose ends and too many factions fighting for the marketplace. Few were ahle to "ee the wood for the trees'. Amid all the confusion, it seemed to Vickers and to others that the V I000 was the answer, especially as Vickers had the VC7 project - the next step on from the V I000 themc - waiting in the wings for the future. The conflicts relating to the sizc of aircraft rcquircd and to the nccds of its principal u'cr seem to have been recogni:ed and ignored at the same time. The ultimate paradox is that, in the end, BOAC ordered an aircraft that exactly

met it specific tropical route needs, and the needs of the RAF transport. A version of the V 1000 would have fulfilled these requirement, yet, because there was no existing airframe to assess for a commercial app] ication (as there was in the KC135/707 project), BOAC showed little interest in the V 1000/VC7 to whi h it may have been a partner.

Regrettable Decisions and Harsh Judgement In 1955, it became clear that BOAC wanted to buy off-the-shelf 707s from Boeing as state-of-the-art Atlantic airliners, despite the fact that, good as they were, they were still in many ways firstgeneration aircraft. There was even the sugge tion that 707s hould be licencebuilt in the K and old to the Commonwealth! Britain's very real chance to seize the future, advance the art of the airliner, and stay ahead of the competition for a decade or more, was thrown away. The cancellation of the RAF order had a direct impact on the development of a potential worldleading civil airliner as a spin-off from the RAF project, but the British Government seemed unaware. Sir George Edwards, head of the Vickers team at the time of the cancellation, told the press, 'I think it is a national deci ion that we shall regret for many year' to come.' In plainer Engli h, it was a blunder. Amazingly, the blunder was compounded. Politically-inspired defence cuts killed off the V 1000's state-funded input (as later happened with the T R 2, another ail{rame of advan ed potential); again, the commercial ramifications of cancelling the project, and throwing away Britain's Icad, did not seem to dawn on the government. In addition, BOAC and the industry were still arguing about whether to go the jet-turboprop route or to take a jet-age risk. The BOAC management's decision-making process, affected by government pre sure and the fact that BOA's role for the nation remained unclear, contrasted clearly with the firm decisions taken at this time by Qantas of Australia. Through the excellence of its te hni al advi 'or', pilots and management, Qanta was even able to secure at rea onable cost from Boeing a one-off, pe ial-order airliner in the short-bodied, higher-flying

26

707-l38 model. This far more capable 707 was unique, with a degree of ' hot and high' performance. It was adaptable to both the Empire stages of the ydney-London 'Kangaroo' route, and was also able to tackle the Blue Riband, long, thin sector acros the Pacific, where its high-flying economy of operation really made a difference. Qanta used its 707-13 s alongside its later 707 -320s, tailoring their use according to route needs. It also reengined th fleet with later-model Pratt and Whitney turbofans in a rebuilding programme. Thus, it clear management decisions and its knowledge of its role paid many dividends. Qantas had been put under pressure to support British interests, and take the VCIO; the aircraft would have been ideal on some of its routes, but not on all of them, and not on the Pacific routes, which were of increasing finan ial importance to Qantas at the time. In 1961, ir Matthew Slattery, BOAC's hairman, toured Australia and supported the VCIO in public. By then, the BOAC technical department' confidential views on the VC I0 seemed to have reached the ear of others. lattery later expressed his concerns about the VCIO's economics, yet wisely felt that to ubject the aircraft to criticism before its entry into service would do no one any favours. At that time, BOAC's poor financial performance (notably in 1959/60) had opened it to criticism, yet the corporation was supporting the national interest by taking the VC 1. lattery's report to the Minister of Aviation, Peter Thorneycroft, covered a II th is, as well as the haste wi th wh ich the V 10 concept for the MRE routes had been drawn up and signed. In addition, the creation of the BAC company - absorbing Vickers et al into a greater national aircraft company affected the decision-making process. BOAC seemed to want to bend with the commercial dictates of the period after all, the corporation had an airline to run - yet inherent in its decisions lay the beginning and the end of Britain's ahility to produce a really big jet airliner. urely it was important for Britain's national airline to have an all-British fleet based on merit and not on political armtwisting? Many thought that BO C could have it all, but BOAC seemed to sec things from a different angle. The historical facts are clearly recorded. They include one incident when BOA had criticized the VClO, at a crucial

VICKERS Al D THE VCID - TilE COMPA Y. THE CONCEPT AND THE POLITICS

The VelO Man: Sir George Edwards George Edwards surely encapsulates the spirit of Vickers. He joined Vickers in 1935, quickly began to make his mark in George Stannard's engineering department, and went on to work with the company's Chief Designer, Rex Pierson. Edwards was closely involved with the development of the Wellington and did much work on its specialist roles, notably on equipping the airframe with the magnetic ring that, attached to the Wellington, was used to clear mines on the sea surface. Edwards worked on several Wellington experimental types and also worked with Barnes Wallis and his bouncing-bomb experiments. Strength of character and a personality that inspired admiration from the workforce saw George Edwards rise to assume command at Vickers after Pierson's early death just after the Second World War, just before the Viscount came to fruition. George Edwards stuck with the Viscount, and his faith saw it through. Under Edwards' command, a spirit of inventiveness, a superb degree of artisanship, and a 'can do' attitude grew within the workforce. Difficult problems were often solved by a group sitting down in an informal manner, working through their options, and achieving a remarkably simple yet effective solution to an engineering problem. There was, clearly, under Edwards, a positive team spirit. Edwards was knighted in 1957. In less than two decades, he had risen to the position of head of the new British Aircraft Corporation, and then commanded the British end of the development of Concorde. In the intervening period, he oversaw the design and production of military and civil types, notably the Valiant and the VC10. Despite being a 'boffin', George Edwards also had commercial acumen and, as a Vickers managing director, played a leading role in the tough government and commercial airline decisions and arguments. He also pushed hard for the sort of international collaboration that he knew was the only route to large-scale, international airframe construction and as such took a leading role in the Concorde story. In the darkest days of the V1000 and the VC10, it was George Edwards who went on unannounced factory walkabouts to meet, reassure and inspire the Vickers workforce. Although not a commercial pilot, he was, at Vickers, an undoubted captain of the flying industry. At the time of writing Sir George Edwards is in his ninetieth year and, as popular a figure as ever, is also a leading light of the Brooklands Museum Trust.

time when certain African and Asian 'Commonwealth' airline were interested in buying the aircraft. They were put off by BOAC's statements about the V lO's economics. According to many, BOAC's figures on the VC10's conomics did not tell the whole story - to the detriment of the airliner. It is true that the VC IO/Super V 10 was heavy, but that was inherent in its de ign. Although its AP (Aircraft Prepared for Service) weight was 7 tons greater than a 707, a number of its benefits outweighed this potential handicap. The 707 could not do what the V 10 was designed to do, a the reverse argument that the V 10 was a failure because it could not do what it wa not designed to do (be a 707 rival on 707 routes) - now seems perverse in the extreme. Surely it

is fair to say that BOAC asked for the VCIO and that it got what it wanted for the task reque ted. The argument about the economics of the Atlantic airliner seem to miss the point, yet were used for leverage against the VClO. The VC10 was judged har hly; in fa t, its achievement of its specific task wa excellent. BOAC did make the mo t of the VC] 's attributes in passenger terms, and created an advertising campaign based around the airliner the like of which had never been seen before. The V 10 had some friends within BOAC - mostly at operational and engineering level - and made many more after its introduction. In the end, BOAC de igned and created its own engineering and rooling programme for servicing its VCIOs. This programme was so good that

27

Vicker itself took on board some of the ideas.

A Difficult Climate The view of ir Giles Guthrie, BOAC Chairman from 1964, that 'the same business principles apply to air transport as they do to selling socks', reflects the climate of the period. This was underlined when, on 7 May 1964, Flight Inte111ational printed the statement and added, 'I'll bet you can't find any darned holes in that argument.' These attitudes emerged as the air raft entered ervice, and after, yet their root can be traced to the birth of the V 10. Back in 1956, it had been argued that

VICKERS AND THE VCID - THE COMPANY, THE CONCEPT A D THE POLITICS

the delay in developing an engine for the all-British product would mean that BOAC would lose out to its American rivals while BOAC waited for the VlOOO/VC7. The shrewd observer will note that those American rivals were powered by the same engine that powered the VCIO. Clearly, BOAC had had its fingers burned with the Comet and the Britannia and its judgement was affected by this. It is also true that there was, even then, a 'Boeing-only' faction within BOAC/BA, which has prevailed to th late 1990s; it has only recently been broken by the Airbus story. Vickers knew what they were doing. The Valiant, Vickers' first really big jet airframe, with its crescent wing, buried engines and great weight, was a superb product, and the V I000 took much of its lead from the work done on it. The V 1000 was way ahead of its time in structural, pressurization and aerodynamic terms. The prototype was almost complete, the expensive tooling had been forged. This was not just a 707 rival, but a great design in its own right and a stepping stone to the VC7, an aircraft that would have led the world and left Boeing way behind. Its cancellation in 1955 was a disaster. When it axed the VIOOO, Britain had thrown away the future of airliners; in the view of Vickers Managing Director George Edwards, 'We have handed to th Americans, without a struggle, the entire world market for big jet airliners.' Although much of what had been learned

on the VIOOO was saved for another day, Britain walked away from the chance to dominate the airline world for years, leaving that position to be achieved later by the Boeing 747. On the face of it, the accountants - the risk-minimizers in government and at BOAC - had won. The answer was simple: buy stop-gap aircraft, then go for the 707. Yet this answer forgot the sure and certain fact that, in order to secure further aid and government funding, BOAC would have to buy British! Foreign-currency restrictions and the needs of political parties at elections were not as divorced from the decision-making process as one might be led to believe. It came as no surprise when, after placing an initial order for 707s, BOAC announced that it needed an aircraft to serve its Empire routes. Needless to say, this aircraft would have to be better than the 707 if BOAC were to buy it. The debate about prop or pure jet was still raging, and the wasted opportunities relating to the aborted V 1000 and VC7 were still very fresh in the mind. In this climate, in 1956, the VCtO was begun as a series of derivative studies from the jet Viscount/Vanguard themes. The 707 was not yet completed, the Comet tale had created a lead and lost it, and Britain had very briefly ruled the airways and then relinquished its rule. All the time, in the background, had been salvation in the form of what would have been the V 1000 and VC7. The skies of the airlines of the

28

world were messy, and the dictates of commerce were unclear; the industry seems to have created its own mess and then had the affrontery to complain I This was not the only time such a debacle would occur; it would happen again a few years later, when the same sort of meddling ruined the Hawker Siddeley Trident. Incidentally, underlining the company's foresight, Vickers had pioneered a tri-jet formula in 1956, with the Vanjet. So, although the remains of the VIOOO and the Vanjet became the VClO, hindsight shows that, had the V 1000/VC7 and Vanjet gone ahead as separate, long-haul and medium-haul jetliners, Vickers would have had the world market for such aircraft sewn up years before Boeing and Douglas filled identical niches with the 707, 747, DC-8, DC-lO, and 7 and DC9 airframes.

n

Out of this particular debacle came the VCIO - undoubtedly one of the greatest pieces of industrial design of the twentieth century, probably the most elegant airliner ever, and certainly the best-performing airliner of its genre. It earned higher load factors than the 707 through its passenger appeal, which did not wane after the newness of the design had worn off, it required less structural work in service, and it carried enough extra passengers to offset its weight disadvantage, thus earning a profit for BOAC. The success of the VC lOis evident - but it was not indicated in BOAC statements at the time.

CHAPTER TWO

Design Perspective Requirements, Tenders and Orders Conceived in 1956, the VClO was born on to paper in 1957. BOAC had finally cut a path to a decision and had real ized the possibility of being allowed by the government to order 707s, provided they order a British machine as well. Quite whether the government meant that BOAC should procure a British 707 equivalent for the sake of it, or whether it should demand something different as well as better that could also compete on 707 routes, is a good question. Even the airline men in the industry were confused. Design proposals such as the De Havilland 120, HP97 and an Avonpowered VC 10 type fell at this first fence. It seems that it was acceptable to ask the impossible, and to complain when it was delivered. There were many different views of what was needed and how to service that need, and the design parameters took a long time to be settled. The VC I0 design reflected the needs of its intended task, but BO C complained about the way in which Vickers chose to meet their request. By spring 1957, the Chairman of BOAC, Vickers and the government agreed that Vickers would, on a privately funded basis (albeit with guaranteed orders from the state carrier), tender for the jet that BOAC never really wanted. BOAC decided that it needed twenty-five VClO-type aircraft for its southern and eastern routes for which the aircraft had principally been tailored. The airline then asked for more than th is nu mbel' of VC lOs ina larger version (wh ich became the Super VCtO), for the Atlantic routes for which it had always pinned its faith on the 707. BOAC would go on to order many more 707s and the VC 10 was stretched into the Super VClO to make it commercially viable on a seat-per-mile basis for BOAC's western and oceanic routes. It would have been even more viable if it been left as a 2l2-seater, which

Vickers suggested in the first place, but that was not to be - at BOAC's behest. There were political imperatives urging BO C to order a British craft, but the mess did not stop there. Vickers needed to sell VCIOs to make a profit and, if BOAC were to swap its existing orders for Standard VC IOs for the more economically viable Super VC lOs, the loser would be Vickers. Vickers also had to learn to create the VCIO and its advanced wing, it had to cover its costs and, although it planned to use the Vanguard jigs as much as possible, it did not know if this would be feasible. The process would take time and money, but it was an essential part of what was needed by an airline whose previous role had also been as a subsidized national institution. Vickers knew that the Commonwealth countries would provide an excellent market for the VClO, and indeed its performance tailored for their regions made it very popular in later years. However, in 1957, the company still had to prove that it could ome up with what BOAC had asked for - which was more than the best of what was then possible. BOAC needed an airliner that would carry a 35,0001b payload non-stop over 2,500 miles, and would be able to get airborne with that load from a 'hot and high' tropical airfield. As well as this, the machine would have to work on the easier Atlantic routes. This was probably the toughest commercial requirements list for an airliner contract ever; it was not an easy task, even for a company like Vickers. The original costings put each VllOI VCIO model at £1.5 million pounds in 1957, rising to a planned £1.75 million. The Super VClOs would cost over £2.5 million pounds apiece. After the contract was signed, in early 1958, for an order of thirty-five aircraft, Vickers started design work in earnest. BOAC still wanted to influence the design and its Chairman called for a stretched version. This was then seen in its Super 200 guise as too big, yet it might well have become a

29

'Jumbo' to compete with the DC-8-60 series and, in double-deck form, the 747. Between 1958 and 1960, much swapping of orders took place between the original Standard and the finalized Super variant. Such was the confusion and concern not least about delivery schedules, where delays would obviously cost BOAC hard cash - that the VC I0 contract was rewritten in 1960. The original order was changed to fifteen Standards and thirty Super models, and by the end of 1961 this had changed again, to ten Supers with three cut from the Standard order. In the end, BOAC took twelve VIIOI Standards and only seventeen VI151 Supers. At the same time, other airlines were also showing an interest in the VClO concept. British United Airways and its flamboyant head, Freddie Laker, first became interested in the VCIO as early as 1960; this airline was behind the large, left-side forward cargo door that became an option on the Standard model VC I0 airframe. Such pioneering created the mixed cargo/passenger role long before the 'combi' cabin mix was so heavily marketed by Boeing for their 747 model. Although BOAC was the launch customer, the VClO was not solely a BOAC aircraft.

Design Influences While BOAC was making order and specification changes, Vickers also had to make changes, and absorb the costs of such changes within the VClO's initial design. The original plan had been to amortize costs of the VCIO tooling by using the Vanguard jigs in Vanjet mode, which would clearly limit the scope for growing the design. Perhaps this mistake was Vickers' own, yet it reflected the procedures of the time and the way that aircraft were evolved. Even the Vickers Advanced Projects Office must have been constrained by the conservatism prevalent at the time in the British mindset and in the British way of doing things.

DESIG

PERSPECTI VE

o

o

0

+ The jet Viscount in one of the early drawings from Ernest Marshall's file. This was the first Vickers jet airliner idea.

The Vickers Vanjet VC10. Published for the first time. and proof that the VC10 label was first applied to the Vanjet studies. an early variant drawing from the Vickers design office. This is the tri-jet design. Note the Vanguard fuselage/windscreen frame. integral airstairs and buried rear-engine installation.

The Vickers Lineage that Led to the VC10 Viscount Jet Viscount

I Jet Viscount with Vanguard wing

+ pylon engines

Jet Viscount rear-engined tri-jet

I Jet Viscount/Vanguard as Mkl Vaniet

I Vanjet Mks2 and 3 (up to Mk15) with both twin and tri-jet layouts. some with Valiant outer wing

I Vanjet as two versions - short- to medium-haul (BEA) and long-range (BOACl both three-engined trijets. Avon/Conway engines

I BOAC version gains fourth engine and becomes Vanjet - VC10 MklVN with military specification optioned version for the RAF. Conway MklO engine

I Finalization of definitive VC10NllOO shape

30

Whatever the reason for the mistake, Vickers soon realized that they would have to start afresh and leave the existing framework behind. The costs rose, but so too did the chance to move the concept on. Suddenly, there was the possibility of building a six-abreast seat cabin and having larger cargo containers under the floor; now an industry standard, six-abreast seating was another Vl000jVC7 first. BOA upplied it payload and performance needs for its most difficult outstation and then it was up to Vickers to come up with the good. [n doing 0, Vickers looked to the past and to what might have been the future. The Vanguard and Vi count airliners had pioneered new construction techniques of advan ed monocoque form, and much of what had been learned through their manufacture wa pa sed on to the VClO. Most notably it benefited from the thousands of drawingoffice hour that went into the V I000 and Vanjet. Some of the ideas that would have

A rarer view of the Tay-powered Viscount in 1950. with its underwing podded engines mounted on a Viscount 630 airframe. Many have remarked on how much the later Boeing 737 resembles this aircraft.

31

DESIG

made it inro the V 1000 and Vanjet were thu incorporated, and not everything had been wasted after all. Interestingly, as with the VIOOO, Vickers included a military transporr ver ion of the Vanjet for the RAF, with a cargo floor and loading door. Both the e themes made it on to the VClO. In the end, the VClO ended up filling the design niche that the VI 00 had been cr ated to fill- the ability ro perform both a military RAF role and a civil BOAC

DESIGN Pl, RSPECnVI:.

PER PECTIVE

role, mostly on the 'hot and high' routes of Afri a and Asia. The great thing about the VClO was that it was so capable and so excellent that it could easily be modified into an Atlantic skyliner ro perform alongside the 707, although there were penalties inherent in using the design for this task, for which it had not initially been designed. 0 other airliner had been so versatile before thi, and none is obvious ro this day. The V 10 carried extra weight as a result of its origins.

Subsequent bad publicity about that extra weight and its negative effect on operating co t was a cynical ploy for corporate and financial reasons on the parr of the very company that had set the requirements in the first place. The politician got in on the act too. Roy Jenkin MP made the following statement in the House of Commons: It would he much hener for our stntus to make a highly succe""ful plane with the engine, in

A head-on view of the early jet Viscount with extended span and two engines. t'

/

r--

"1

/ /

/ /

/

+ Another derivative. the jet Viscount. with a swept tail fin and changed engine installations.

the ..,alne r'o"',tiun . . a.. . thl' American.. . han~

Negilll\"!:

thc,r" th
fa . . . hiol1ahk

engIne:"! 111
different

P~)S1t 1011.

This kind of statement reflects well the arguments and ill-informt:d opinion that went on aho\'C the heads of the men who were designing the VC I to a -,pecification supplied I y the aircraft\ huycr and the gm'Crnment. As Flight international maga:ine put it at the time: 'The VC I0 design heing as it was came from necessity not national \·,mity.' Many of the aircraft's detractors would have done well to find out tht: faets hefore jumping on the antiVC I0 bandwagon. The roIl'S, claims and counter-claims starred hefme the VC I0 was born and continued right up to its delivery. Flight International published the following editorial of 7 May 1964:

(Olllllll'lll

(hat

'lhoUl the pO"'ltI\'l'

velo

:"\0

illrllllef to h,l\'l' ,I cahill whllh due ... !lot even

. . l'l't1b

mddly ,leh",c the \\'
i.. . nnw

comment

What ,.. . the Ju . . rJf;Gltion for a jet
,llmo.. . t

fC<1CtHl!1'lfy.

filn~e rL'rfofm.lnce and hlghef oper
~uhud\

prclcn,j, th"l Ihc VCIl' h,,, nut pn>ndcd \lI,d \\'urk Inr a m,,)ur p"n uf thc Rn[l~h ill fCfilft, l'ngIl1L'

t flC...

and equlpmenr Indll"'~

"lnd rh I.... of CUUf"'l' mu...r nor he ar

BOAC'> cxpcmc. FI"t ,n "dd'f1un

to

Ih".

111

rhe rhfcc thlrlg:'l that miltrer tllo... t In .Uf tfan ...-

porr - ",fely. cfhclcncy .1I1d cumfon - the VCW make~ maJOf pO... I[I\'e ullltflhlltlOn~ III

o

[\\,0:

port cllfCfilft "'lIh~lantl
rakc-off "nd l'lI1ding 'pcc,k Thl' it duc' h)' nu Ie" th"n 10-15 pcr cent, \\'lth "II th"t Ihi, mcans ,n ",fel)'. And thi> i, the ti", lung-h",,1

~_l~-~~~~====~~_-_~~~'~

G-)

Engines:

three Rolls-Royce Avons

Wing area:

1,4 70 sq ft

T/

12 per cent. Tip: 10 per cent

weep (25 per cent chord):

000000

88

This drawing is the true beginning of the Vickers jet airliner. It is a twin-engined design. but an optional third tail-mounted engine has been sketched in. While having some Caravelle style to it. the angle of the fin and general look is still Viscount-related. The engines were Avons. Drawn in 1955, this design was way ahead of its time. The plan was for a twin-engined BEA variant and a three-engined BOAC version, but BOAC insisted on having four engines.

32

32 degree

Fuselage:

Viscount 10/ 40 + 40ft

A commodation:

56 Fir t las or 69 Tourist Cia four abreast. p to 75 Tourist Class five ahrea t with a reduced pitch. 0-1 seat with longer-body ver ion

All-up weight:

120,0001b

Fuel:

42,000Ih. Long-range version to have Valiant outer wing, ag tanks with 36,5001b, integral tanks with 10,ooolb and a wing centre-section tank of 20,0001b

wising speed:

Rut this kind of halanced per,pective was in the future. A~ the Vickers design team, headed hy Ernest Marshall and supported hy engineers, aerodynamicists, and struCrural and propulsion experts, sat down wirh a hlank sheet of paper, rhey were working in a political environment that aircraft developers hal'C ne\'er ,uffered before, or since.

",fct)' .1I1d cumfun. Th" I' rhe hr,t p"hlic tram-

pecification - Vanjet VC10 Mkll (penultimate, three-engined version of Jet Vanguard)

root:

thl'" ml',lll:'l III p.l...... l·llgef Cl)mtl)rt, ;llld ct)uld Illeflll III rl·\'('IlUl'.

550mph

33

'The Shape of the Future' This aircraft had to be different; there was no point in huilding a British version of the 707 or DC-S. To have done so would have proved to many, notably to BOAC, that the British aircraft industry had well and truly lost its way. That course of action would have been cheap, easy and rewarding in sales term, yet it would have exposed the aeroplane to an even greater degree to the 707 argument. urcly there would have heen little point in waiting for another 707, even if it had been British. The VC 10's design perspecti ve was et hy the needs of BOAC, it major customer, and of the RAF order, which would surcly be part of the affair. The VCI was not different just for the sake of it. The V I did things differently, but it did more than that because it used advanced engineering to he different; it did nor just use conventional techniques in a new way. In Vickers' own hrochures,

DESIGN PERSPECTIVE

o0

DESIG

o

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COO 0 0 0 0 _ _ ,.1./

this factor was always underlined by the legend 'VCtO - The hape of the Future'. It also had a much longer range than originally requested - 4,000 miles instead of 2,500 miles. An airframe of double-redundancy 'failsafe' de ign was conceived, with doubledup load paths and secondary and supporting structure. These could all support a force deflected away from that force's primary load path if that path failed. In effect, this was 'fail-safe' times two, and it was unheard of at the time. Vickers had worked on th is for the VI 000 long before the Comet split itself apart under pressurization forces, proving the integrity of the Vi kers product. The airframe also had the world's first application of a large T tail with four mounted engines. The excellent Caravelle had pioneered the use of two rear-mounted engines, yet it was Vickers that was first actually to design a jet on the rear of an airframe - as opposed to 'imple testing - as early as 1951.

_

o

PERSPECTIVE

000000000000000000

c:

_0

00

By the time this revised variation of the previous design was done, the aircraft had become the 'Vanjet' VC10 - yet still without the T tail in this Mk2 guise.

VICKERS MEDIUM RANGE JET TRAN5POIH GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

Viscount to Vanguard to Vanjet Little is known of the rear-engined, jetpowered Viscount, which came ahout as an idea for meeting the needs of British European Airways not BOAC. To Vickers it hecame obvious that it might be possible to develop two jet-powered Viscount deriv,Hives - one for BEA and the other, a larger version with greater range, for BOAC and the R F. This is how Vickers, on a step-bystep basis, by adding jets to the Viscount and then modifying it into a Vanguardwinged Viscount that led on to a jet-powered Vanguard or Vanjet, moved on. Many know of the Viscount that was used to test jet engines - notahly the Rolls-Royce Tay turhojet - yet few are aware that, hidden deep in the Vickers archives, are the drawing. of the various engines and engine positions proposed for developing the Viscount.

JJ

The initial idea was to mount two and then four ene engines (previously tested on the Viking airframe) on the wings, on one pylon per wing, and with the engines paired either side of the pylon in a duct housing on the four-engined version. Both aircraft look remarkably like the later Boeing 737, and notably the big fan-engined versions. The fuselage was a Viscount 810 body, and ultimately, after sever,ll versions on the drawing board, the wing from the Vanguard was incorporated. This proposal was drawn up on 4 June 1956. A drawing dated II June 1956 shows a Viscount 10 fuselage extended by 40ft, mated to the Vanguard wing and carrying four Verdon engines. A Mkl version, with long-range 'slipper' wing tanks, was also drawn. Both aircraft would have carried 73 seats at a very generous 38-in pitch.

000000000000000 ~~~-===~

c::

-'"~ :~-----------

_ _...l\..:..

Opposite above: Moving on from the jet Viscount and the swept-winged, rear-engined Viscount type seen on page 32, the Vickers team decided to mix the new Vanguard fuselage with the outer sections of the Valiant's wing. This is the three-engined version with a Valiant tail fin (Drawing no. 79924).

VICKERS

MEDIUM RANG£ JET 1"RANSPORT. GENERAL I\RQANG£MENT. DtitG. ~f 79'!t25. S~-r

34

\

Opposite below: Drawing 79925 shows how the Valiant wing and empennage were discarded in favour of a new main wing and a low-set tail - the alternative to the T tail. The 'straight through' tail fin-mounted engine was radical at that time and later appeared on the McDonnell Douglas DC-10. Indeed, this aircraft has a definite mini-DC-10 feel to it - especially in the front-on view and in the nose contours and tail design.

35

These Viscount derivarives featured non-swept wings and upright empennages, but, very shortly afterwards, the Vickers projects department came up with a Vi.count jet powered by two early-model Conway engines and featuring a swept tail fin. It is no surprise, therefore, that the next design derivation was a threeengined Viscount with all three engines rear-mounted, and swept main wings and tailplane, as well as a swept fin. This became the definitive Vanjet, but went through several changes of shape. In its main version, the tooling for the swept wing came from the Valiant's outer-wing design. This elegant aeroplane featured three Rolls-Royce Avon jets, a 52passenger, four-abreast cahin and Tupolevstyle undercarriage that retracted into large canoe-style fairings on each wing. It was abo envisaged a,' being available as a twin.engined version for REA

DESIG

PERSPECTIVE

DESICi

0000000000000000000

\. )

VICKERS VC 10

""1iI:

~EN[RAL ARRANC[~(NT

In Mk4 guise. a larger tail engine intake and a stubbier tail are suggested. Amazingly, this tail fin looks very much like that of the later Trident. For the first time. the T tail is used. but with both a bullet fairing and an end-plate fin top, Although it has shades of the later Trident and Tupolev 134/154, the later VC10style wing and tailplane angles are becoming evident.

36

(Mk4) and as a larger and heavier threeengined version with greater passenger capacity (Mk5) for BOAC. Vickers had had close talks with BEA and BOAC ahout these two aircraft which were lahelled in-house hy Vickers as the V 4, 5 and 6 projects - and only a lack of development time in the fa:tdeveloping market segment scuppered their chances, This aircraft had the potential to take the worldwide 72 7/DC-9-type market sector years ahead of the time of those particular airframes, but it was not to he. The design file for the aircraft also includes developments up to a Mk 16 version which featured three Con ways two wing-mounted and one huried in the tail. This highly unusual configuration was not tried again until Boeing suggested such a tri-jet formula for the updated 727, which became the 757 in the 1980s. The last development (labelled Mk IS!) of the comhined Viscount and Vanguard mixand-match experiments featured three rear-mounted Conways, a wing of I , 0 sq ft, a 2,5 O-mile range with 21, OOlh payload carrying 45,500 gallons of fuel. This design speCification hegins to approach VC IO-type parameters. oon after the three-engined version was shown to BOAC, the airline stated that it would not fly the Atlantic on three engines; the aircraft had to have four engi nes. (I I' was also at th is stage that the Vanguard-style cockpit-window frames were changed and a more expensi ve, newer design and tooling was accepted itself very simi"lr to the VCIO's production windows,) Once again, Vickers altered the design and created the fourengined Vanjet that was the true ancestor of the VCIO. Thousands of hours of work went into this development process, countless deri vations and calculations coveri ng routes, payloads, headwinds, airline specification needs and design and tool ing options were ilwestigated. The depth of detail in the papers is incredihle, including defining exactly which hits of existing airframes (such as the Vanguard and Valiant) could be transposed and how they would have to be modified and at what exact cost. The drawings, shown here for the first time, explain how that process occurred, and set the record stra igh t. BOAC and BEA were not the only airlines to which the Vanjet was pitched.

Existing Viscount and Vanguard customers, notably Trans-Canada A irl ines, were al 0 targeted. egotiations got as far a a telex from a Mr Glenn at TransCanada (TCA or TransCan) to Mr Lambert at Vickers Weybridge asking what the weight penalty would be for increasing the fuel capacity of the Vanjet to 55,000Ib, and what the non-u. able 'trapped' fuel weight would he. Mr Lambert replied at 5.30pm on 25 June 1956 to advise that the fuel cap,lCity increase weight penalty was 600lb and that the trapped fuel weight was 3001h. A nother letter, dated 25 May 1956, notes an approach from Mr Jim Dailey of Trans Australia Airlines about the Vanguard versus the Lockheed Electra. The airline's problems with loads in Australian operating conditions were causing them concern, Dailey suggested to Vickers that they create a 'poor man's Electra' by taking the Vi.count and adding a nell' wing and extending the fuselage. Dailey could not po sibly have known that, a' he wa making this suggestion, Vickers was doing exactly that, creating the Vanguard and dreaming up the rewinged, combined Viscount-Vanguard airframe that was the Jet Viscount or Vanjet! The letter also state that the airline would have to buy DC- s 'in order to keep up'. The fact that such derailed work was going on hetlveen Vickers and the airlines underlines the extent of the market opportunity. The point about having to get DC-8s 'to keep up' douhly underlines what was lost with the cancellation of the V I000/VC7 and the delays to the Vanjetderived VCIO. It is proof that Vickers could have ruled the world in airliner sales with its advanced designs. The indecision and politics of others denied Vickers order' from airlines such a TCA and T AA, and destroyed any chance of dominating the world market for short-haul, medium-haul and long-range jet. The drawings and figures on page 35 outline the airliners that Vickers created long before the succes of the American twin jets and tri-jets of the late 1960s, Known as the Jet Viscount cheme 2/3 and then Mk4 and Mk5, thi aircraft is the true gene is of the Vanjet and, ultimately, of the production VC IO. The drawings clearly show the lineage. To quote one retired Vickers designer, 'It was the jet Viscount and the way that it became the Vanjet using Valiant bits, that was the ori-

PFRSPECTIVE

~L-

-=

r,

_ .... \ r \

--'------

\

t\

VICKERS. V.C.IO.MK.N:

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT Previously unpublished. this is the true beginning of the VC10, Still labelled as a VC10 Mk4. it shows for the first time the four-engined installation. clean T tail and new fuselage/nose shaping. At this stage. the combined bullet and fin top remain. Of note is the fact that this design showed a tapered. rear stub wing for mounting the engines that had a shaped and curved trailing edge; this is close to the later Seddon-type design that was used to reduce drag on the prototype VC10, Between this drawing and the design's reappearance, the design and production prototype reverted to a straight-edge stub wing,

37

DESIGN PERSP

D - IGN PERSPEcnVE

riVE

gin of the definitive VCIO. We got there step by step through all that work.' In a document dated 14 April 1957, Vickers design team speculated on the Vanjet's market, clearly deciding that they could offer two versions of the same ba ic airframe to serve the needs of both BEA and BOAC. The document noted that, 'Technically there can be no doubt that Weybridge must be capable of the task of designing the Mk4 and Mk5. If we do not, who else in this country can do it better, or, who do we combine with to become a success. Failing this, once more the Americans get the laugh.' With hindsight, these words seem wise indeed; ubsequent developments only serve to underline their foresight. At the time, the Jet Viscount and the Jet Vanguard were crucial in what came to pass. In their design features it is easy to spot shapes that were later seen on the Trident, 72 7, DC-9 and even the L-I a 11, with its buried third engine fed from an S-shaped intake duct. It is also possi~ Ie to see in the sketches a 'straight through' rail fin-mounted engine placing that is identical to that of the DC-la, which came along nearly two decades later. Even the nose profile is fan,iliar in the DC-l . By incorporating all the e themes and adding in the VIOOO/VC7 work, a clear pathway emerged for the VC10's advanced features. Even those early ketches show the curved tail plane and elegantly swept fin, complemented by a clean wing. The final version of the three-engined Vanjet-VCIO was the four-engined airframe that can be seen in the drawings. It is the result of over 80 studies stemming from the jet Viscount onwards. Initially, it featured four Avon 29 engines or three

---

--

, •• , _..

H .....

j_ ........ {c...-... _ )

_l:)'-: }

80 • I"" (Ul~" P..."""_ . . . . . " to - ..,. c. n , ~-."' ( 100-

"--'

_

".,

"''-1(_'"

, 11..-.......... } )

s

.......

'i.."TI "" !I~~

"''to:....

, .._ _..

VANJET

V'IO.

ACCOMMOOAT~

_.U.

_._,,_•. ...,..&

The three-engined Vanjet with S-type ducted tail engine installation could have accommodated varying loads. Here, the 80-, 90- and 100-seat configurations are considered. The generous 39in seat pitch was then the norm in Economy Class, which today often crams passengers in at a seat pitch of 3D-33in .

lOB PA-5SEW(.ERS +/5 A!>R("'Si.

The Vanjet VC10 featured tail-mounted engines this shows the buried tail installation. However familiar this looks today, especially in view of the L1011, 727, Trident and Falcon 50, this idea was untried and unseen in 1954 when it was drawn up at Vickers.

VICKERS

VA.NJET

'1'10.-,,".

ACCOI'\I'\OD",Tl0N.

Again, a 1954 Vanjet idea, showing the cargo door and elegant tail.

An alternative, staggered seat layout was also considered and is shown in this drawing with the pitch set at a closer, but still comfortable 34in pitch.

38

39

J

DESIGN PERSPECTIVE

pecification - Vanjet VCIO MkV BOAC Version, Engines:

four Rolls-Royce

pecification Ref: B 61

on way R.Co 10

Dimensions Length:

160ft

HeIght:

39ft

Wingspan:

125ft

Gross area:

2,6

ft

WeIghts Max. take-off:

245,OOOIb

Max. landing:

171,OOOIb

Max. zero fuel:

149,OOOIb

Basic operational:

115,OOOIb

Max. payload: weep:

34,OOOIb 30 degrees

(25 per cent chord) Fuselage length:

132ft 6in

abin Dimensions Length:

92ft 4in

Freight volume:

1,640cu ft

Fuel capacity:

10l,OOOIb

(Avtur) Range:

3,000 miles wIth wing plus central tanks, 1,700 miles wIth wing tanks only

CruIse speed:

5 Omph. Pressure differential lb per sq

allowing 3< ,000ft cruise.

tn,

Conway las. In the end it was the Conway that got the better development profi Ie and the de ign graduated to the usc of four 17 ,SOOlb-thrust rated Conway . Thi~ shape and pecification for the first time defined the recognizalle VClO shape and tyle. The re lilting VC I airframe had a central keel, a trong wing and much of it' structure was machined from olid, using techniques pioneered on the Valiant and Vanguard. It would be stronger, faster, sleeker, much quieter in the cabin, and a better airfield pelformer than the 707 or DC- . It would he safe, easy to handle and not test the skills of pilots who, no matter how experienced, were transferring to the VCIO from propeller-powered machines not always an easy transition. The VCIO would offer a slow, stable approach profile in the landing pattern and give the pilot a great safety-enhancing parameter - time to get the approach right and time to monitor the aircraft and the glideslope environment, and the weather conditions and sink rate. Vicker, as~ured thar it would be very 'afe anJ al'o have that characteristic pa~senger appeal thar i, difficult (() quantify. It would build upon the reputation of the Valiant, Viscount and Vanguard and, de pite everything, it would be a world-beater.

"--------

WING TANKS. 8,450, IMP. GAL.L.S -

65,000Ib(AVTAG)

CENTRE> SECTIONTANI(, Z,OOO.IMP.GAL.L.S -

15,500 Ib,(AVTAG)

TOTAl. TANKAGE, 10!'-50 IMP. GALLS -

VICKERS

80,SOOlb(AVTAG)

VANJET ~UEL

c....ss

7'l. -

."

61

MI.l£D

-

PI
c.1.,'!os P..,,!>£...c.

:: -= ::~~~:~~I::~lotS

-

,,~, ..

.... (.."

t.ut

.......)

= :::;:~~ )

""-....... 1t. ..T ... A'

~'!I' ",TC. ..

The three-engined Vanjet VC1D featured wing and central body tanks. as seen here. Of note is the fact that the elegant curved shape of the tailplane is already mooted at this stage. The four-engined Vanjet with its VC1D designation now took on a clearer specification that included a six, abreast layout or a mixed-class seat plan. as seen here.

40

41

VC IO.MK'!.

TANKAGE.

DESIGI PERSPECTIVE

CHAPTER THREE

A Detailed Description The :,>tructure of the VC to represented everything that Vickers had learned over the years, as well as reflccting the thinking of rhe men hehind Vickers. The VC IO's supreme elegance was thc result of the work of a committee of designers rather than just one person. Designers, engineers, stress experts, electro-mechanical experts, aerodynamicists and many others grouped together to create a form that served function, yet also boasted lines of incredihle beauty and presence. To anyone sranding under that wonderfully swept tail fin, observing the shark-finned line,' of the tailrlanc, the nose-down stance and the falcon-like angle of the wings, the VC I \ hrilliance of form is clear. Many agree that this is (he great shape of late twentieth-century industrial design, a' well a simrly being a very prctty aeroplane.

Finally, the definitive VllOO Type VC10 prototype plans, here seen with the original square wingtips and unmodified engine, stub wing, exhaust features. Note the lack of the in-board wing fence and the fifth pod for carrying a spare engine.

42

Personnel A group of talented reoplc gathered at the Vickers construction sires in the early 1950s. Their work on the airframes of that reriod proved to he a foundation for the VCto as it came into being in late 1956. It is only right to record their names to the best of the ahil ity of the arch ives and of the memories of those who remain. Any omissions are accidental. The namcs at rhe front of the Vickers VCI 'house' were ir George Edwards and Ernest E. Marshall. upporting them wcre the project managers, team leaders, section heads and assorted boffins that represented the spirit of Vickers Armstrong Ltd and its VCIO airliner. The aerodynamics ream comprised the following: Ken Lawson (Chief Aerodynamicist); Hugh Hemsley (later Chief

Vickers' Sir George Edwards (middle) and BOAC's Sir Basil Small piece (right) sign the order book for the BOAC VC10s.

43

Engineer); Basil Stevenson (Asst Chief Designer); John Hay (Assistant Chief Aerodynamicist); Roger Back (Aerodynamicisr); Heinz Vogel (Aerodynamicist). The engineering team comprised David McElhinney (Chief Stress Engineer); David James ( 'hief Structures Engineer); John Davies (Chief Weights Engineer); David Findlay (Leader Wing Stress); Alec Paterson (Fuselage Leader); Maurice Wilmer (Fuselage Projecr Manager). The systems teams, covering asrects such as weighrs, electrical systems and mechanical sysrem,>, included Ted Petty (Chief Projccr Engineer); Harry Zeffert (Leader Electrical Engineering); Jack Ratcliffe (enior Electrical Engineer); Gerry Hitch ( enior Engineer Electrical); Colin Jehu ( enior Engineer Electrical); Gordon Howells (Senior Engineer Flight Controls); George Aylesbury (Leader Mech.); G. Weber ( enior Designer/Autopilot Engineer); Jim Richards (Deputy Chief tressman); George Turner (Team Lcader); Harry Welton (Senior Foreman). Production was overseen hy Bill Potter (Assr Producrion Manager); Ken Keenan (Asst Production Manager); Wally Chapman (Assr Production Manager), who direcred the building of the first VClO, G-ARTA; and Cyril Redman (Senior Foreman). Hugh Tyrer was Vickers Chief Metallurgist, while Ted Chivers and Jack Swanson were enior Draughtsmen. Mary Raven was Ernest Marshall's secretary. 'Spud' Borer worked on the pressurization system and cabin strength de ign. The fl ight-test ream comprised the following: 'Jock' Bryce (Chief Test Pilot); Brian Trubshaw (Deputy Chief Test PilcH); Bill Cairns (acting as Chief Flighr Engineer); John Cochrane (Te't Pilot); Eddie Mc amara (Te t Pilot uper VCIO); Doug Howley (Flight Enginecr); Roy Mole (Flight Engineer); Ob ervers Chris Mullen, Roy Holland, Ian Muir and Peter Diss ( uper VCto); Dennis A kery (Flight Test Dept); P. Baker (latterly BA Chief T t Pilot, VC10); and R. Radford (Chief Pilot BAC, tanker conversions).

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Vickers (BAC) mined the BOAC, BUA and EAAC training captains in a team run by Dennis Hayley-Bell and Lew Roberts. Representatives of launch customer BOAC were closely involved with Vickers from the VClO's early days, and even occupied their own office at Weybridge. Two important names relating to BOAC's involvement at the design stage are J.R. Finnimore as BOAC Aircraft Development Manager and Don Ashman as In-Service Engineering Manager for BOAC/BA Powerplant testing for BOAC was overseen by J. Romeril as head of its Power Unit Development Unit. Captain orman Bristow publicly represented BOAC's Aight crew team on the VC to but the original BOAC development team was headed by Captains H.J. Field and AP.W. Cane. Charles Abell was BOAC's Chief Engineer. In 1962, BOAC set up its flightmanagement team for the soon-to-beintroduced airliner: Capt A.S.M. Rendall (Flight Manager), Capt F.W. Walton (Deputy FI ight Manager) ami Capt J. Nicholl (Chief Training Officer). Senior Engineering Officer G. Sears acted as Chief Engineer Officer/Instructor with

Vickers Weybridge Advanced Project Office in the 1950s. To the right, Ernest Marshall (Chief Project Engineer). and to the left, John Davis (Chief Weights Engineer). 'Jock' Swanson in background. Ernie Marshall seems to be holding a four Dart-engined, high-winged, swept-tailed airliner proposal for SEA!

Still at the APO bureau in 1957 (left to right), Frank Ward, John Davis, Jock Swanson, Ernie Marshall, Maurice Wilmer, Sammy Walsh.

STEEL LIGHT ALLOY The VC10's monocoque frame.

Senior Engineering Officer H. Hughes running the VCIO development flying. Flight avigating Superintendent was W. Robinson. In 1963, BOAC added another nine Captains and another nine Engineers to form a core or 'nucleus' training command within the airline. Other well-known names in the command at the time were Captain Stoney, Captain Todd, Captain Phillips and Captain Gray. Unlike some members on the staff of BOAC, these people were highly complimentary about the VC 10. British United Airways also had an office at Weybridge and was involved early on with tuning the standard airframe for its needs. J.R. Sidebotham was Chief Planning Engineer, while Bill Townsend was BUA's Resident Engineer at Vickers in the so-called 'Airline Alley' offices. (Later on, Bill Richardson was British Caledonian's VCIO Engineering Officer with Vickers, or BAC, as it had become by then.) BUA's Captain P.A Mackenzie was the airline's chief VCIO pilot. East African Airways appeared later on the scene, with Captain G.W. Mitchell as Ch ief Instructor on its Super VC lOs. These were the leaders and managers of the VCIO's creation, production,

44

testing and flying; the larger workforce at Vickers that made the VClO a reality actually numbered more than 8,000 men and women.

Airframe Construction and Manufacture Vickers had worked previously on military aircraft, but they knew that the highly loaded, highly stressed approach to airframe components, which had prevailed in some of the 'short-life' military airframes in the preceding years, would be of little use to a long-life, safe and sound airliner. Viscount, Vanguard, Valiant and V 1000 experience would prove invaluable. Vickers therefore created an airframe that was not just a self-supporting monocoque similar to that which Boeing and Douglas employed in the 707 and DC-8. It was a milled-from-solid monocoque with added structural chassis sections in the form of a central keel, wing torque box, and a safety cage-style underskinsupporting structure of almost geodetic type. The basic airframe was both fail-safe and safe-fail. In other words, the under-

45

lying structure could take the loads of the principal structure if it failed, and then absorb more through a multi-load pathsurrounding network. Much of Vickers' earlier work on the Valiant's centre wing section - safely fitting four paired engines in a central wing box - had been highly advanced for its time. The result was even safer than the way the four centre-mounted, buried engines were housed on the Comer. In employing such techniques, Vickers incurred weight penalties that the 707 and DC-8, with their lighter-gauge simpler structures, avoided. However, in time it would be proven that the Vickers technique needed far less structural work and fewer repairs throughout the life of the airframe. The Vickers airframe also had to operate in harsher conditions and carry a rear-mounted engine structure - by necessity of design, not choice. From the word 'go', the VCIO was a very strong, very tough, very safe airframe, and incidents in its later life would prove that. The VCIO was so safely designed that it has almost certainly prevented passenger deaths. The VC IO's designers adopted a structure with k)w skin-stress levels, and with

A DETAILED DESCRIPTIOI

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

sated for by the safety and aerodynamic advantage of the clean wing and the centre thrust-line power band. Through this simple yet highly effective design, a double monocoque hull with a low stre -supporting outer body was also beefed up via its central chas is. It wa true 'belt and braces engineering', in what remained the biggest jet aircraft ever made in the K or Europe right up until the Airbus A340 thirty-five years later. ny possible fuselage cracking was contained by closed-off load paths. The fu elage skin panels were gauged at 17s.w.g. and had a maximum length of only 6ft - this would stop a long crack spreading. At the top of the pressure hull

the panels were laid transversely with circumferential straps over them; beneath the floor, longitudinal trap were used. The fuselage was of oval cro -section, but with flat surface at the wing-root rib. Divided into four ection, the fu elage was ba ed on a cabin pres ure differential of91b/sq in with localized doubling. It was constructed from alloys such as Ln, DTD 50Z0 and 5010. The main underfloor keel was designed to be repairable. nlike other airliners, the door openings did not need plating or patching, as 6in radius corners and thickened surrounds toughened up the 10 al area. In the crucial wing area, the fuselage retained its pressure above the wing-skin

The VelD cockpit roof section being assembled in 1960.

multi-rath load-carrying networks underneath the skin. The metals used were copper-rich aluminium alloys and steel, as well as others. The structure as a whole is of note because it was the first time an airframe had been milled from many solid parts; over 55 per cent of the V lO's structure was machined from solid. Machining from solid billets of metal rather than fabricating greatly reduces the number of rivets needed and thus reduces the chances and causes of tre cracking, corrosion, creeping and shear strength failure. This really was unusual in a jet airliner; the Vanguard had pioneered the ideas, and the VC I0 took them to a larger scale. The American, used to fabricated, riveted, welded and bonded multi-structures, had never seen anything like it. The entire fu elage was laid up from a deep central trough or keel box and then wrapped in frames and skins. Unlike other aircraft of the time, the skin used rivets, splices, lap joints and bolted-on stiffeners in a minimal way. Instead, the VCIO had

its major stress-bearing skin panels notably the window panels - machined from solid and integrally stiffened rather than just having doubler plates. Stress levels were therefore kept more uniform and peaks and hot spots of stre s concentration were avoided. Surprisingly, the finished panel was actually lighter, with fewer crack-raising areas, and was far smoother from an external aerodynamics standpoint. As such, there was no obviou window, belt-line patch, as there is on the 707. ( otably, Fokker aped the VCI 's smooth window/fuselage design for it F.Z .) The windows, made from a product called Oroglas 55 created by the Lenning hemical company from a Rhom and Hass ( A) parent company process, to a 14 x 9in elliptical hape at ZOin pitch, al 0 broke new ground. Each window was formed by three sheet: an inner non-loadbearing trim glass covered the middle panel, which took the main pressurization loads, while a secondary, outer panel could also take a load if the main inner panel

46

failed. To double up on this fail-safe theme, the main window sheet was made bigger than the hole that it plugged, and it was inboard-mounted. By this means, it self-sealed from pressure forces and added to its own frame strength and fatigue life. The entire fuselage length of this hull was supported by hooped frames and based on that central keel. At the wing, undercarriage and tail junctions, the skin and hoops were further supported by torque boxes and diagonally split load anTIS, and via cleating and stringer that bonded the skeleton together. Channel frames were doubled up and did not simply stand alone. The threat of turbine di c damage from an exploding engine is a vital consideration with closely coupled engine and the rear end of the VClO therefore featured some ma sive reinforcing to contain any splitting or tearing that might lead to explosive decompre sion or structural failure. The weight penalties of all these safety considerations were more than com pen-

The central fuselage side panel. 35ft long and machined from solid.

47

and pressure-box area between the wheel, which doubled up to achieve that aim. Around the emergency-exit cut-out and close to the overwing hoop-frame reinforcement, the fuselage skin was increased to 0.039in in a panel of 34ft length, which greatly increased the hear strength of the area. A ZOin wide torque-type box ran rearwards, wrapped in a steel girdle based around a spine member. Wing loads were absorbed by both the spars and this stru ture, and then transferred by I-section frames into the structural body or cage over the area, which was in effect a triple torsion box. This box was also a fuel tank. Wrapped in light alloy with S.99 steel reinfor ing hoops and cross members, the

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A DFI AILIoD DESCRIPTION

This view shows the milled work and localized reinforcing that ensured the VC10 a safe structural life.

wing box led into each wing and spar pickup point. The wings were skinned in zinc-rich DTD 5050 high-strength alloy nn their tnp (cnmpression) surface and 24 T 24 aluminium copper alloy on the lower tension-loaded skin. All the inspection hatches were milled from solid, as were their frame housings, and they were all on the top surface of the wing. The three-part wing tructure featured integrally machined panels with localized reinforcing. There were only even panel on each wing section, which reduced the chance of a crack fracturing, and the outboard wings - of three top panels and four lower surface panels were the ame. There were ten Fowlertype flaps and near full-length leadingedge slats - with an inboard void tn control airflow disturbance and pre ure differentials near the wing-tn-fuselage join and engine-intake area. The flap hung off a beam that itself hung from a wingspar rear web. The flaps were hydraulically driven off span wise shafts and stopped travelling if any asymmetry developed.

The rear fuselage structure and engine bearers take shape.

48

The flaps were honeycomb-structured. The spoilers went up to 50 degrees and could be operated independently. The leading edges followed experience with the Vickers Viscount wing and were lowstressed, while the VCIO's slats had mechanical stops and integral de-icing ducts. They were chemically etched, using a technique that can reduce fatigue strength yet also toughens up the surface to foreign-object damage. This technique needs to be closely monitored, and it was o in the VCIO. The wing-skin milling was overseen I y Harry Welton, a senior foreman at Vicker Weybridg . The entire wing structure carried the fuel load of 17,94 imperial gallons divided into ix tank numbered I to 4 via a 1a and 4a sub-tank designation. Each engine was fed from the corresponding tank on each ide, but cro -feed was available. Without wing-mounted engine to offer bending relief, a further weight penalty was paid in beefing up the structure. However, the V 10 absorbed the problem, the only outward sign being less

49

visible in-flight dihedral in comparison to the 707. All the alloys used in fuselage and wing were ultrasonically tested for flaws before and after machining. Interestingly, the fuselage floor is a composite of end-grain balsa and steel sandwiching known as 'Mallite EGB4'. This early omposite offers low weight and high strength and was developed by the Mallinson Company. Light and strong, it also absorbed noise very well. The mounting offour engine at the rear - then unique - produced an over-engineered structure but has, none the less, proved its worth over the eal". t the rear, the kin and structure metal was of d thicker gauge, and the tringer were of Z section. There was a closely woven basket of fin and engine support beams that intersected in a manner certainly suggesting g odetic principle, if not actually acknowledging it. The angled fin spars ran down into a bridge of the main engine-support beams and 10ft long spectacle-shaped engine bearers, which had three pick-up

A DETAILED DE CRIPTION

A DETAILED DESCRIPTIO

points for each engine. These bearers (drop-forged by English Steel) and their inn r beams were machined, back-to-back channelled and th n box-reinforced, and had great hear strength and anti-twi ting torsional rigidity - es ential for a stru ture carrying the thrust offour Conway engines. The local reinforcing of this area led Vickers to claim that the structure would survive any lisastrous event or overstre sing, and that, with protected hydraulic runs and electrical routing, at least 50 per cent of systems would remain available. Later events in commercial service would bear out this claim.

The nacelle design wa, again, new ground and much work went on to create a low-drag fairing and a low-weight structure. Much of the fairing was made up of inspection panels and the inlet mouth were hollow ection with alloy leading edge. The stressing in the nacelle and engine-bearer region that is mo t often encountered is the accelerative down force encountered on landing; the weight of four Conways achieving a sink or descent rate that comes to an abrupt halt on touchdown has to be contained and ab orbed on a repeated basis. Under the tail fuselage area of any high-time VCIO

airframe there will be localized 'dimpling' of the skin where the frame has tran"ferred such loads. The in-flight loads arc actually Ie crucial. The Vickers-built 'in-house' undercarriage featured a la-degree rake-back and two- tage compressor to muffle the landing. The adverse effects upon absorption power of raking the oleo leg were minimized by cranking its main beam, giving further travel. The rear wheels also touched down first to soften the impact. A well as creating the softest landings imaginable in a big jet, this low-pressure tyred, multi-beamed, compressed landing-gear design also cased

/

/

The first fuselage takes up its final shape. No other airliner boasted a structure built like this; note the widened beams and hoops, the thick floor cross-beams and massive antitear strapping work.

The forward fuselage section taking shape. Here, the extensive use of components machined from solid is exemplified by the fuselage section being made up around a freight floor surround.

50

he downward touchdown loads transmitted up through the fuselagc and into the tail area. A hard, unyielding, vertically mountcd, truck-type gear bogie would certainly have announced the VCIO's arrival on earth to its passengers and to its engine beams and tail spars. Through good design, such ill effects were avoided to the best possible degree. Of greatest interest in structural terms were the fin and upper area of the tailplane and bullet fairing. With a T tail, the bendlllg stresse on a fin arc far higher and much more crucial in structural terms. The vertical fin must therefore withstand the twisting and loads impo ed by the horizontal tailplane urfaces. There are al 0 aerodynamic considerations, notably the deep stall phenomenon and the sweep, mach effects from the buffet zone. imilarly, the central bullet-shaped housing that divides the two eparate halve of the tailplane must cope with sparll.vise flow and vortex ffects. Given all this, it is hardly surpri ing that the V lO's tail area received so much attention from the designer.

The fin consisted of vertical pars and a framework of beams to absorh stresses. The fin skins were much thicker than normal, so chord-biased stiffeners would have become useless. The stiffening stringers were therefore placed spanwise with three s}lars and three fin frames, all doubled up by the thick skins' load-bearing capabi Iities. The tailplane was mounted from the fin-support box via two roller bearings, thus allowing pivot. The third pick-up mounting point was through a screw-type actuator that connected the fin top to a forward-reaching arm on the tailplane tructure. From here, steel and alloy sleeves carried the mounting and load forces into the various casting and rib that created the core of the tailplane before everything wa dissipated towards the tailplane tip. The actual wing structure then became conventional. At the crucial point where the panels and loads meet near the fin join, machining from solid was not possible, due to the wing-skin p sition, so localized reinforcing was employed with sub-load ~upporting

51

paths to achieve the fail-safe criteria. The tailplane carries its loads from tip to tip, but as the fin loads are passed into the fuselage they have to pass through angles, or a 'hinge' point, to put it in engineering terms. It was no easy achievement to reconci Ie all these factors and create an elegant empennage. The tailplane was swept at a greater angle than the main wing to maintain mach-related airflow properties. Aerodynamic 'flutter' implications were an essential part of the VC la's tail-unit design, and on three occasions the aircraft' tail-de ign features saved it from in-flight structural failure, thu proving the work done by Vickers to be not only necessary, but also correct. The three-piece rudder and elevators were honeycombed section, de igned for ease of replacement. With the force of four Conways only held ISin from the fuselage, and with the buffet from the thrust reversers to contend with, these surface had to be monitored and replaced when needed. Overall, the VC la's structure i stiffer than normal yet is not brittle. Unusually

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

1961 - G-ARTA is really beginning to take shape in this view. The clever engine-mounting system is clearly seen and the tail-fin support structure is on show prior to fin attachment.

52

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Summer 1961 - the Vickers Hum plant presents the first completed tail structure.

53

A DETAILED DESCRIPTIO

sites were pread out and that the British aircraFt indu try saw multi-centre skilling and Fabrication as the norm. [n later year, both Boeing and Douglas sub-contracted major airFrame structure work to their various si te in the A. For the V la, major parts were transported in From Filton, Hum and South Marston near windon, where the tropicalized pitfires were made For the Far East campaign of the econd World War (and which is now, ironically, home to Honda). Other parts came From St Nazaire in France, where ud Aviation introduced the tooling and milling From solid to France, later used, like so many VClO themes, on the Anglo-French Concorde.

Powerplant, Controls and Systems Po sibly the only ben fit reaped From the delays to the V 10 project wa that its engine had the time to prove themselve in other applications and to be developed into higher thrust variants. Thus it was that the Rolls-Royce Conway proved an ideal candidate to power the VC I and, on ervice entry, had already amassed thousands of hours in use. In the opinion of many, the VC10 was the first airliner to be over-powered, and remains the only one to be so. While the accountants may have winced, the pilots and passengers were very happy, as were

The wing is joined and the aircraft begins to look the part for the first time.

For an over- tiff tructure, it can absorb stress rather than suffer From it. The structure offers exceptional stress absorption, unique level of damage tolerance and valua~ Ie long-I iFe characteristics taken to a new height. [n testing, the wing took a 6 per cent overload, and deflected by 7Ft in one direction at the tip, with a 6Ft opposite imposed flex, before Failing. The VC[O is thereFore probably one of the saFest and mo t load-capable airframes in the history of civil aviation - no mean Feat. The work on load path and Fatigue resistance broke new ground, and could only be tested in trials and in service [iFe. Fortunately, uch monitoring proved that the VC[O did not

need the very expensive rerla ement of major structural component uch as spars, skins and ribs that a(fl ict all other commercial airframes. OF course, it did need localized replacement work, and there were in- ervice stre -related events, but the basic structure was, appropriately For Vickers, built like a battleship. This great money-saving bonus For the airline operator was oFten overlooked. The aircraFt simply sailed through its 30,000-hour checks with only the basics of xpected work on the structure required, and was certificated to 60,000 hours. Much of the Frame had a 'leave-alone' design [iFe of that long. Allied to a very

54

thorough anti-corrosion system, under which the whole airframe was dipped and also entirely painted, this aircraFt's structure dared to be different and met all its requirements in a manner that silenced the many doubters of the time. The basic tandard VC10 tructure easily absorbed the 13Ft Fuselage ext nsian, fin tank and increased weight of the lengthened uper VC10 model. The variou part of the VC la's stru ture were brought together at Vicker Brookland ite near Weybridge in urrey, which was close to its other main Factory site at Wisley. As a result of wartime diversification, it wa not surprising that the

Now wearing paint, G-ARTA gets ready to emerge into the world.

55

the engineers. The pro pect of a lowtressed, cooler-running engine requiring Ie use of Full power rating, bod dwell For in-servi e liFe. Hot engines mean hot component and sub equent earlier Failure of cri tical parts. Work started on the V [a's chosen Conway 42 engine in [95 . [t was a development of the Conway 12 engine (CO.12) first een on the very early 707 . The origins of the engine had been passed down From Rolls-Royce's work on .10 and beFore that on the Avon. [t had also seen service on the Valiant, albeit buried in the wing-root rather than on the 707's wing-mounted pylons or slung at the ba k of the Fuselage, as in the VCIO.

A DET ILED DESCRIPTION

A DETAILED DESCRIPTIOI

The early on way pumped out I ,OOOlb of static thrust at a 0.6 bypass ratio. By the time the on way made it on to the VCIO, it poured out 20,3 70lb of thrust as the C0.42 Mk540 and this increased to 21, OOI~ in the onway 43 Mk550 ver ion. The onway has a fixed intake and quite a narrow mouth to the nacelle; this leads air on to static guide vanes that funnel the air to the main blade, which are seated amid a titanium duct. Air pre'sure is more than doubled (x 2.25) b fore being split in the core of the bypass duct principle. Part of the flow (38 per cent) is streamed off and guided around the combustor area and then re-streamed at the rear, while the main 62 per cent is channelled into the combustion process

at over fifteen times the intake value.

imonic Here, flame tubes coated with alloy ignite the incoming air with the dispensed fuel mixrure. After the explosive combu tion mix tage, the resulting thru t flows out and at the ame time drive the rotors that in rum feed the main intake and compres or stages. After this combustion stage the exhau t and bypass gasses come together at uch speed that they create OLllld-waves that approach the supersonic, hence the distinctive crackle or burble of the V la's engines. The vanes are pivot-mounted so that they work with aerodynamic and centrifugal forces, rather than fighting them. This improves their life and reliability. From the engine, bleed air is streamed

off for various systems, notably anti-icing and other optional, on/off bleed air requirement. Air from both the high- and lower-pressure cores is used for various sy tems, notably h.p. air for fuel heating. Fireproof bulkhead were incorporated as parr of the design change needed between the pylon-mounted CO.12 and the tub-mounted C0.42. In the CO.12, much engine hardware could be slung off the engine, but with the C0.42 VCIO in tallation, a central mounting beam had to be installed due to the engine itselfhaving to be hung off a three-point mounting from a ingle arced bearer. It therefore became neces ary to construct a servi ing 'bay' in order to work on, and change, a VC10 0.42/43 ngine. Airlines had to

The first BOAC Super VC10 takes shape in late 1963.

learn to do this in their own bays and not to over-stress the airframe or engine beams when ondu ting work. Over a decade later, shortcuts in engine-change procedures cau ed D -10 accident, but the V I operators avoided such events through good design and procedure . The improvement in thrust over the CO.12 that were needed for the 0.42 were achieved by increasing airflow, and to do this a larger low-pre ure stage was needed. In order to avoid unbalancing the engine's core, and having to add more rurbine tages, Rolls simply scaled up each stage by smaller degree - rather than just bolting on a bigger blower. This meant that they could tweak the high-pressure

stages into handling the increa ed flow without having to run the engine shafts at higher rpm or run the ri k of a hot-running engine core. Thi increased airflow boosted thrust by 16 per cent and reduced the specific fuel can umption. Aparr from an I.p. stage compressor of slightly larger diameter, much of the 0.12 dimen ions remained. Improvement to vanes and cooling were al a incorporated. The oil systems are elf-contained, the electrical generators mounted in crossfeed parallel, and thus can still run if one fails as well as being individually controllable. DC power is 115V on a 2 V system backed up by two standard-type 24V battery systems.

A clutch of VC10s, including (centre) the first BUA machine, nestles in the Weybridge factory.

56

57

An extendable ram air-driven electrical rurbine known as the ELRA T provides 8n emergency means of re-starring engine in-flight, and of powering vital instrument and elector-mechanical systems. It emerges from the parr/centre fuselage belly on pilot command and its short shaft is spun up by a small twin-bladed prop mounted on it nose. The ELRAT can be used once in flight and then has to be repacked and checked by ground engineer. On more than one occasion it has saved the aircraft. The danger of main-engine rurbine vane/disc failure is even more crucial in closely oupled engines such a the VCtO's. Although not as risky as an

DETAILED DESCRIPTIO

VCIO

FLYING

CONTROLS

AND

HYDRAULIC

SERVICES

26

~10

;----::::

:::: 3

----

BUA's first VC10 rolls on its wheels to await its wings; note the l40in x 80in cargo door.

____--JI uncontained engine failure in a wing-root l uried application such as the Comet' , much thought had to be given by Vicker and Rolls-Royce as to how to stop an adjacent engine being taken out if its neighbour exploded, A compressor casing capable of containing a blade failure was developed. The initial J.p. stage is wrapped in a flanged steel case while the stage 4 position sees a thickened magnesium cladding. Experience with the Valiant counted for much. Turbine overspeed is handled by an emergency shut-off control that selfactuates in under one second of a turbine burst from shaft failure. This was a major contribution to engine safety pioneered by the COA2. The VCIO look-alike, the Ilyushin 11-62, did not have such an excellent ystem and suffered a number of di astrous and fatal crashes due to such engine failures being uncontained. In airline 'ervice the VCI did indeed suffer a number of turbine 'bur ts', and on 'ever'll occasion~ large parts of the engine departed from the airframe. Thankfully, due to the integrity of the de igned safety systems, these engine explosion were contained, did not disable the controls and did not hreak the rear fuselage. The added safety proved itself worth every penny of its weight

SYSTEM

A

HYDRAULIC

_SYSTEM

B

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

-

Windscreen wipers parking unit ose undercarriage and steering Slats Spoilers/ airbrakes Flaps Main undercarriage Tallplane incidence control Hydraulic pumps (System A) Hydraulic Pumps (System B) Extreme emergency ram air turbo-pump

::

~CIRCUIT _CIRCUIT

ELECTRICAL

~~~~i'llil CIRCUIT

CONTROL RUN SEALS IN REAR PRESSURE BULlHEAD

Hydraulics layout.

V.C.10 FLY I NG CONTROLS

velO flying controls systems layout.

A spare Conway engine being mounted on the wing carrying point.

58

2

59

4

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28

Left outer aHeron Left inner aHeron Right inner aHeron Right outer aileron Bottom rudder Middle rudder Top rudder Left outer elevator Left inner elevator Right inner elevator Right outer elevator Electric generator (CircuIt 1) Electric generator (Cironi t 2) Electric generator (CIrCUit 3) Electric generator (Circnit 4) Extreme emergency ram air turbo-generator

A DETAILI::D D - CRlJYrlON

A DETAILED DE CRIPTION

The Vel0 cockpit. or perhaps more accurately the flight deck. The roomy accommodation and depth of vision are apparent.

penalty, and undoubtedly allowed lives to be saved. In the combustion section, \'alves, nozzles and rube that were known to deteriorate in the CO.12 were modified, and hardened alloy gla:ing were added to crucial component. The oil system also had to be modified due to the temperature changes caused by enlarging the I.p. stages over the CO.12's de igned level,. Thus modified, the normal 0 degrees centigrade temperature is certificated up to 120 degrees centigrade. Thrust reverser were initially seen on all Four engines, but buFFet proved a

Technical Details: Rolls-Royce Take-off thrust. minimum rating at sea-level I A conditions:

20,3 70lb

Maximum continuous:

16.5601b

rUlse thru t:

4.5oolh at 35,00ft and 475 knots IA

O. 231b/hr laximum pre ure ratio:

15 to I

Engine length:

54in

Engine diameter:

5lin

Basic dry weight:

5,001lb

The prototype G-ARTA in flight. Note the square-tipped wings and exhaust cowlings.

60

onway 42

67

with specific fuel con umption of

A DET IL D DESCRIPTION

pa sengers would still have sweltered in tropical climes, and with a larger cabin and more bodies on board, it could have heen very uncomfortable indeed. Instead, Vickers and BOAC created a Fir t Class cabin that was predictably pleasant, but they et an entirely new standard of cabin design and cat comfort for long-haul Economy Class travel. The VC IO's Economy seats really made a difference when compared with previou level of cabin comfort. A revolutionary seat was designed featuring a one-piece moulded construction with a single support spar placed near the front of the scat; the three-seat units were manufactured by the Aircraft Furnishing Company Ltd.

Those sitting behind were no longer in danger of hitting their leg on a hard tructure. Each seat wa independently prung with generous cushioning and a properly padded headrest. Although light in weight and of modular de ign, the seat was extremely comfortable, more so, in fact, than many of the lightweight scats that came into use in the weight-conscious 19 0 . The boast was that thi wa the most comfortable Economy Class seat in the world. General passenger opinion at the time seemed to agree with the claim. This was the first real jet-age scat - it had a wipe-clean AB pia tic cladding around the frame and back, a table that offered two positions and a seat frame

The Elrat and Hyrat seen deployed. The Hyrat was an option not common to production versions.

problem and a hange was made that saw the outer engines only carrying the cascade-type sliding-door reversers. The uper VC 10, however, operated for some tim with all four reversers on its COA3 Mk550 engines, which, although externally similar, carried an additional stage intermediate pre sure compre"sor in comparison to the COA2. Most of the engine acce sory systems of the COA2 come from the CO.12 but have been modified for even better reliability the engine benefiting from all the early in-service learning experiences seen on the CO.12 application. Items such as the oil cooler and electrical controls on the fuel heating sub-assembly were given particular attention. Icing and cros -wind airflow problems were dealt with too, not least by positioning a static mounted Dart engine towards the COA2's intake and seeing

what happened I It was thus proved that incidence and angle variations, always critical on rear-mounted engine installations, were within safe limits. Su h work led to a 1,200-hour initial service life engine overhaul period, with that figure increasing in subsequent service life. The COA2 was first run in June 1960 and approved in 1963 after 16,500 flown engine hours during which only one unscheduled engine removal was needed. nder the route proving trials, mainly with BOAC's G-ARVF airframe, nothing went wrong. The COA3 for the uper VC I differs mainly in having its higher thrust delivered through an additional pressure tage. It delivers more thrust and does so by running at higher rpm and a slightly higher turbine entry temperature than the COA2 variant. Various component strengthening

62

deals with such rises in temperature. The two engines arc insrallationally interchangeable. A spare COA2 or OA3 can be carried under the starboard wing in a fifth pod, carrying container and fairing.

Interior There seemed little point in creating an advanced airliner with flight and structural characteristics that were beyond the contemporary accepted tandards, only to till it with old-fashioned eat" and an old-fashioned interior. If BOAC had simply tilled the VCI with "eats and furnishings of the Comet or Britannia era, the whole feel of the VC lOs' advanced nature would have been undermined. imilarly, if BOA had kitted out the VC I0 with an early-generation cabin air system in Britannia or Comet style,

Wearing an early interim livery. BOAC's G-ARVM leaves the short. 4.2000 Weybridge runway on its maiden flight. Note the runway warning strip painted on the tarmac letting the pilot know how much length is left. Behind. the Vickers factory buildings and some of the workforce looking on.

63

that introduced new safety standards. Although optimized for BOAC, this seat design was common to the standard Vickers VC 10 customer specification. Con tructed of I-liduminium alloy tube and featuring a hydraulic recline actuator, the seat was unique in it forwardedge upport-beam cantilever design and had easy-to-replace foam cushions weighing lIb loz per section. It achieved a successful compromise between comfort and economy of construction. BOA et the scat pitch at a comfortable 34in, which, combined with the scat design, gave all but the very tallest of passengers a degree of Economy Class comfort that was previously unheard of.

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A DETAILED DESCRIPTIO'

The production specification galleys were more standard affairs of shining aluminium and stainless reel. The forward galley featured a floor access hatch to the underfloor electrical compartment, which could not be seen by the passenger itting in Fir t Class. The cabin crew liked working the vela and a great team spirir emerged, frequently noticed by rhe passengers. However, all wa not ideal. The tandard and Super models both featured five toilets - three at the rear and rwo at the front. The thre rear toilets were beyond the galley and foodpreparation areas, which meant that the cabin crew sometimes had to make way for toilet-bound passengers while they were preparing the meal service. On the upers, the forward bar position was beside the main entrance door which made it difficult to serve pre-deparrure drinks

to Firsr Class passengers while others boarded. As seals became worn and panel gaps ar door openings degraded, noise levels in the rear cabin began to creep up. The lack of in-flight entertainment (other than cabin music) was also a rather surpri ing omission in the British Airways interior refit. adly, the idea for an underfloor minilounge on the stretched Super VCIO did not come about, but given the fact that the airliner was tight on luggage hold space anyway, thi was probably a good thing. Although most single-aisled large jet airliner interiors are fairly similar, the VCIO's claims to have the quietest, smoothest-riding cabin with the most comfortable sears was certainly true, and at the core of its pas enger appeal.

A rare shot of the early wind-tunnel testing that went on to investigate the T tail - this time without the engines in situ.

The original interior for the Standard V 10 featured a blend of light colour for the wall and ceiling mouldings, whi h were complemented by bold cushion- and seat-material colours. Although a vi ually relaxing design, it was not notably distinctive; change were made to the interior scheme on the later uper VC 10 that ubsequently found their way on to the tandards. The cabin interior of the uper V I was designed by Charle Butler Associates of ew York through a Mr Robin Day and featured a light and airy cabin designed to bring a feeling of breadth and also of confidence and modernity - in a very British

manner. The Economy seats were upholstered in a BOAC-specified two-tone weave-style check pattern with three different colour used for the headrest covers, while the side panels were picked out in a gold and ivory motif. The rear bulkheads in the First and Economy cabins featured a large illustration in the style of a classical etching, depicting a view of the River Thames and london ba ed on a 1647 drawing by the artist Wenceslaus Holler. later on in the life of the aircraft, the BOAC VCIO interior was revised into a Briti h Airways scheme that few became fond of. The seventeenth-century style bulkhead illustrations were replaced with

64

pop art' in garish colour that matched the somewhat p ychedelic hue of the revi ed interior fabrics. This cabin also brought in overhead bins, replacing the rather old-fashioned racks with which the airliner had been introduced. The interiors of BUA/BCAl and other operators used the tandard Vickers basic production aircraft interior tied to their own in-house colours. However, East African irway really went to town on the interior de ign and trim of it five uper V las. They were decorated with exquisite murals depicting safari cenes, wildlife and a map of East Africa, with strong blue ami ochre seat coverings.

The T tail and clean wings give excellent ditching characteristics. Here. a scale VelO model undergoes ditching trials.

65

Systems The V 10 airframe utilized a plethora of sub-systems, but they were all proven and with double-redundancy split-system capability, known a the dual-splir sysrem. Thu an alternative back-up path wa provided without the expen e of creating complete duplicated systems at high weight cost. The hydraulic ystem was a twin system with identical component and a running pressure of 3,000Ib/sq in. All the pre sure feed lines were made from stainless steel with the return runs being fabricated in light alloy. The fluid used was a fire-retardant brand named Skydrol SOOA. The flaps, slats, landing gear, tailplane incidence control, brakes, steering and spoilers were all hydraulically controlled. The RAF VClDs also featured a Hyrat emergency back-up system.

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

actuation system was independent, but could operate either half of a system if its mate failed. Any runaway control surface could be overridden by the effect of the other ections - this was mo t obvious in the four section elevators and three section rudders. All the control runs from the flight deck through to the wing and control surfaces were mechanical, of rod and lever type allied to cables. The Hobson artificial feel that was brought into these control systems was in an enclosed unit. It calibrated how much feel to add via a measuring sensor system through resistance that was a function of control surface displacement allied to readings relative to airspeed and altitude. This feel unit and its working within the VCIO's systems was highly advanced, and the result of a great deal of work. It regulated feel pressure via dynamic pressure and was unusual in that it included an altituderelated change in parameters capsule. It was therefore incredibly accurate and preci.e. Under given conditions of speed and altitude, the feel force was directly proportional to the control deflection. Thus, no false sensations were offered to the pilot and no over-stres. ing could be acted out. The hydraulic pressure was . upplied through electrically driven pumps to control valves. The flaps, slats, spoilers ami elevators were all carefully machined and balanced, 'lIld 'mixed' into the overall control system.

Interior: the classic VC10 cabin design

The electrical system was a 200 volts ac supplied by four engine-driven generators, each being separately based for added safety. These arc Westinghouse brush less generators - avoiding brush wear, and ultra-reliable at high altitude. D output is via a F rranti transformer and provides a 2 -volt output of 150 amps. The Dowtymanufactured Elrat emergency turbine could be lowered on command, and provided 20Kw through a prop- pun turbineshaft linked generator. Emergency lighting came from a 6V battery. The pre urization and air conditioning were handled by two separate y tems, one providing the flight deck and cold-air intake louvres, while the other charged the main cabin. Fresh air was taken in close to the engines and fed via four compressors to the fuselage. Compressors fed the cabin-pressurization system via sliding, altitude-related input valves. The pressure system was by ormalair, while

Plannair blowers handled the cabin airflow needs. The intake for the Freonbased air-conditioning system, which has a 30-ton capacity, could clearly be seen at wing root, and provided welcome relief for passengers boarding the aircraft in tropical climes. Previously they had had to put up with sweaty propliners and warm Comets. The emergency cabin oxygen-supply system was supplied from a tanked, liquidoxygen upply base on a barometric setting. It provided a hort forced-fed oxygen blast at 0 p.. i. in each mask and then regulated itself to a 40 p.s. i. on-demand flow. The tandard in-flight pre suri:ation range is 6-9 p.s.i. The fuel system had a 17,950 imperial gallon capacity on the tamlard model with an extra fin tank on the Super model (1,350 gallons). Anti-icing was through hot-air du ting with a bleed-off temperature of 225 degrees centigrade.

66

The pilots' windscreens were coated in gold film, with in-built heating elements. Each engine used a two-shot, douhletanked fire-extinguisher system.

Controls The VCIO had fully powered flying controls with an in-built artificial feel unit. The control systems were of the splitystem type, en uring double redundancy and safe reversion to another system pathway in the event of a failure. Thu , all the major flying controls had a duplicated partner and a plit redundancy built into the ystem. The two electro-hydraul ic actuation sy'tems were divided into two group and powered from different upply ources. ignalling was duplicated by mechanical cable run. Each independent half of each respective electrical and hydraulic

Aerodynamics The VC 10's aerodynamics stemmed directly from the operator's route requirements. The only way to achieve these targets was to create the layout that resulted. The main contributors to the aerodynam ic form of the VC I were the Valiant and Vicker .113 prototype. Ken Lawson and the team at Vickers thus evolved a shape of aerodynamic elegance and efficiency, which also looked majestic. For the VC I 's intended routes - MRE, hot and high - particularly effective highlift devices would be needed. The wings would have to offer high lift on take-off and a good cruise performance at highspeed mach numbers - typically mach. 6 (to a max of mach.8 ). The tailplane and fin would also need to be effective, and the engines would need to be rearmounted and high enough to avoid

foreign-object ingestion. With the rearengined configuration deemed to be an ab olute must, mounting the tailplane either below the engines or above them was the only an wer. Initially, ome thought was given to slinging the tailplane down below the engines on a very lowset spar (see the accompanying Vanjet drawings), but practicalities, not least the dangers of over-rotation and of wing- and flap-related airflow interference, pointed to the high T tail as the only an wer. The Caravelle, the pioneer of rearmounted jets, had had its tailplane mounted halfway up the fin, but clearly the aerodynamic implications (not least of compressibility) meant that that site was inappropriate with four engines mounted as a wide, stub-type extension so close to the empennage. Any low-mounted horizontal surface could be subject to, or cause, airflow interference. 0 it was that the fin and tailplane design of the VC I0 were set, and after much wind-tunnel work and calculus, the aerodynamics team at Weybridge worked on solving the inherent problems. The fin and tailplane were given their elegant sweep-hack in order to ensure that their performance characteritics were not out of synchronization with the main wing. Therefore, to maintain mach numher performance and lift, as well as cure compressihility drag effects, they were swept at a greater angle than the wing - thus avoiding deterioration at a lower mach number than the main wing. This is how the fin and tail came to be so swept. However, a glance at the discarded VIOOO, even with its conventional tail design, shows where the elegant angle and sweep of the entire tail had its roots; the two share a family look that also filtered through from the Vanjets. This was the first use of a giant T tail and a greal deal of aerodynamic and structural work was involved in engineering its application. The only previous attempt at a large T tail had been seen on the Handley Page Victor, of which the Ttailed design was the subject of much debate. The Victor's T tail featured a highly wept double-cranked type leading edge to the elevator and a short stubtype vertical fin; as such, it closely mirrored the de ign work of the German designer Hans Multhopp. A young freethinking design genius, with an intuitive feel for airflow, Multhopp worked for Focke-Wulf and created highly advanced, swept-winged jet-fighter designs in the

67

late I930s and early 1940. Hi most radical wa the FW-TA 1 3 of 1944. This design was so labelled in order to credit the Focke-Wulf design chief, Kurt Tank, under whom Multhopp had worked, yet the T tail was Multhopp's own; it became known in the aviation industry as the 'Multhopp T tail'. The 183, and its Mk2 and Mk3 derivatives, became the benchmark for fighter design and were widely copied - notably in the form of the MIG15 and AAB-29. Multhopp's work also showed up in certain English post-war fighter designs (notably the English Electric Lightning) because, after the war, he was brought to England and placed at the Royal Aircraft Establishment. It is shocking to report that the English reputedly drew from Multhopp all of his advanced aerodynamics work, categorized it as 'Top ecret' and then placed him under house arrest and made it impossible for him to work on his own designs! ot urprisingly, Multhopp left England and set cour e for a new life in the U A. Today, the pace huttle rdlect Multhopp's later work on lifting bodies andupersonics. Multhopp was also the man behind the idea for weeping hack the main wing of an aircraft. While his fellow contemporary designer created early jet shapes with ma ive power to force straight-winged structures through the sky, Multhopp went out on his own and, with his skill in calculus and his intuitive feel for airflow, envisaged swept wings with less drag and better high-speed flow characteristics. \-Ie also thought ahout the low-speed handling of such wings and added leading-edge slats. Much of Multhopp's work filtered into post-war aeronautics, but, certainly, lhe Bell X 1 supersonic aircraft and the world's fin four-engined jetliner - the Avro anada Jet - stuck with straight, unswept wings. It was not until the VCIO, with its 32.S-degree weep, and the Convair 0/990, with it 35-degree sweep, that the art of aerofoil weep performan e caught up with Multhopp's dreams. In terms of size and aerodynamic elegance, the VCIO' T tail was the be t tribute to the Multhopp T-tail work. It certainly proved correct his 193 s hel ief that the T tail provided greater control authority at take-off and landing, and had significant drag advantage, as well as offering more pivotal effect. Vickers had, of course, carried out its own rese:olrch into the T tail and pioneered

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Aerodynamics: sculpting work on the tail design. The Standard VC10 achieved a natural nose-down pitch at the stall - a real achievement for a T-tailed aircraft with rear engines.

the bullet-type fairing intersection atop the T tail, but the fact is that it was Multhopp's work - ro which the Briti h had had access - that created the T tai I. The bullet fairing, with its distinctive kink and lender, swan-like body shape that sits atop the fin, cured the spanwise flow and drag compre sibility problems of the junction between fin and T tail. [t also helped structurally. Wind-tunnel testing revealed that a imple fin extension acting Iike an end-plate would have ufficed - ju t as it did on the later Boeing 727 and 0 -9, on which the Ttail principle was employed. However, Vickers tayed with the small bullet fairing atop the fin - it was sound both structurally and aerodynamically, and gave an unexpected performance boost. (Intere tingly, the Vanjet-V 10 drawings show both a bullet fairing and end-plate fin rop on the same aircraft! Typical Vickers over-engineering')

The excellence of the VC 10's aerodynamics is further underlined by the fact that it is the only large T-tailed airliner never to have crashed due to a T-tail deep stall. Every other large or medium-sized T-tail airliner has at some stage - in te ting or commercial service - experienced loss of an airframe in d ep-stall circumstance. The deep tall, or super tall, occurs when the main wing stalls and buffets the tail surfaces, rendering their pitching effect usele as they lie in the turbulent, broken airflow. Moreover, the high-set tail reverses the aerodynamic laws of tailplane effects in stalling. Lowet tailplanes become more effective at the tall because they move below the stalled main wing's wake; high- et tails start out in moother airflow - being above the main wing's wake - yet at the stall they dip inro that wake as the rear of the aircraft pivots downwards. This gives the

68

T tail the ability ro switch its pitch effectiveness from good ro poor at just the moment when it needs to do the opposite. This might ound like a fundamental flaw, but as it occurs at pitch angles never normally seen in commercial service. The flaw is not as great as might be imagined - especially when the safety net of the stick-push system is added. Rear-engined jets, on which the main wing and c.g. are rear-biased, and close to the elevator, are particularly susceptible ro this tailing phenomenon. The problem is made worse by the long forward fuselage, which causes airflow that is already twisting upward, to move further and add to the pitch up - when it is least needed and at the worst possible moment. This is compounded by the movement of the aircraft's point of aerodynamic entre shifting, and ad led ro by the changing effects of the airflow over the main wing,

known as the 'g' break. [f the designer i unlucky, this will occur at the time when the elevarors dip inro the tall wake and uffer a large drop-off in performance. The various T-tailed jet, therefore, suffer not just a stall, but pitch change that are affected by all these facror and are wildly fluctuating. The situation is made worse by the fact that the rearmounted engines are then blanketed in the broken air, spilling off the main wing (just like the elevators are), so that no amount of thrust can save the situation. Thus set, the rules of aerodynamics and stall recovery are also broken, and the air raft will pitch up inro a locked, noseup atti tude and become irrecoverable. With a no e-high, wings-level thunder of flapping air, the machine will des end like a brick at a massive rate of descent. The VC I0 avoided the worst of these potential problems through its power, excellent handling and uperb aerodynamics notably the wing-aerofoil performance and the strong effects of the large, hydraulically powered elevator unit being et high. The e factors delayed its tability-performance fall-off at the stall in high main-wing wake angle. adly, these positive facror were Ie s obvious in the under-powered and tub-tailed Trident; in contrast, the 727 could climb at high pitch angles despite its T tail, whereas the Trident could not. The 727 wa a good performer. [n testing, a 727 had rouched the edge of a deep stall and only the large high-set el varors, and th ir hydraulic actuation, had enabled the pilot to pitch th aircraft nose-down in time before all hope was lost. The tragic loss of the BAC One-Eleven in such a stall, and a Trident prorotype sufferi ng likewise, sharpened the Vickers team's focus on ro the V 10's stalling characteristics. [n an act of integrity, Vickers shared what they had discover d with the American. hief Aerodynamicist Ken Lawson and BAC hief Te t Pilot Brian Trubshaw both went to the A ro liai e with American de igners, and change were made ro the -9 tail design as a result. Vickers had realized that (not least on the BA OneEl ven) a larger elevaror with hydraulic, not servo tab spring ratchet power would give greater response on T-tailed air raft. [t would allow control, and thu increase safety, further inro the deep-stall envelope than a maller, less effective elevaror unit with less power, which would be more easily overwhelmed. Changes were there-

o

fore also made ro the BA One-Eleven. Of course, if wrongly piloted, the VCI would deep tall, but the large distance between the main wing and the very high tail negated the airflow-blanketing effect that tend ro cause deep stall. The in-built stick-push sy tem also contributed to preventing the V 10 getting locked into a no e-up pitch and subsequently being de troyed. However, the prorotype airframe G-ARTA was almost lost at the end of Decem ber 1963 after sufferi ng from a failure in the right inner elevator attachment bracket during stall regime test flying. G-ARTA suffered flutter immediatelyand it was only the superb technique of Brian Trubshaw in the command seat that saved the day. BOAC's VC10 Development aptain Peter Cane was also on board. They descended under emergency conditions, at one point activating the escape hatch to abandon the aircraft. The hatch and chute mechanism failed ro function properly and the crew had ro stay on board even though a 'Mayday' call had been issued. The descent needed careful balancing as the speed was low and n ar the stall level, but the aircraft remained flyable. G-ARTA landed afely but needed a new tail and repairs to her stru ture. The VC [0 had been lucky. Year later, during the V 1 tanker-conversion programme, a similar test-flight event 0 curred. The important point about the e events is that they provide positive proof of the excellence of the VCtO's aerodynamic design, particularly in reference to its behaviour at or ncar the stall. The oth I' problems at the tail involved the siting of the four engines and their effects on rudder effectiveness and of possible buffet/drag from the engines' exhaust region. Intake effects were also of prime consideration. If the engines were mounted too close ro the fuselage, airflow inro the engine nacelle would be affected by the layers of boundary air running down the fuselage and flowing off the main wing - particularly at high angles of attack. Again, there was a question over compression drag between the engine trut/stub wing and the fuselage-to-fin junction. Therefore, ro avoid the boundary layer and other effects, a ISin gap was created between the inboard engines and the fuselage. Exten ive wind-tunnel work solved the problem with the resulting engine strut design, but left a void at the rear of the strut-nacelle intersection.

69

eddon airflow tep was used to infill the area and reduce the size of the drag envelope behind the aircraft by tuning the vortice in the area. (Dr eddon was an aerodynamicist at the Royal Aircraft Establishment, or RAE.) Despite thi, flight te ting of the prorotype airframe ARTA revealed buffeting and exhaust drag. This resulted in a small change ro the engine nacelle incidence pitch and the fitting of the so-called 'beaver' tail unit, to smooth out the exhaust flow. Camber and surface changes were al 0 made ro the valley between each nacelle. Kuchemann tips were added to the main wings to further improve the drag situation. The type VltOl (BOA) VCIOs carried a drag penalty for their service lives, as the 4 per cent wing chord extension and reprofiled tips were first tried out on the B A and Ghana standard [102, 1103 model VCIOs, before being incorporated on to the uper model V 10. This machine also had a reprofiled aerofoil section. Keen ob ervers will also note that the early-development BOAC tandard airframe could be potted without the tall inboard wing fence that later appeared on these aircraft and all su~sequent V 10 airframe. This tall wing fence improved stability near the stall by funnelling localized flow over the wing and towards the engine/fuselage compressibility area, as well as stopping spanwise dispersal of air. [t wa added for certification at the end of the early development flying of GART and G-ARVA/G-ARVF. The V lO's main wing works at very low speed and at very high speed, because it i tuned to perform two tasks at different ends of the aerodynamic scale. tilizing a 'peaked' pressure pattern, the main wing was tailored to have a dual characreristic that could be set and fixed. The wing performanc peaked at the point at which the airflow in the super-fa t leading-edge sonic region itself peaked at its pressure distribution. This created a degree of forward ucrion or flow that was built into the wing's lifting character so as to deliberately create an airflow expan ion wave and allow space for the air to move. This meant that compre ion drag was avoided and the on et of shockwaves wa delayed. Luckily for the VCtO, wing design was moving on at a great pace at exactly the time when its wing was designed. Previously, set theories for angle, incidences and camber had guided designers

A DETAILED DESCRIPTION

10,000 feet plus - Fowler-type flap were chosen. They were as efficient as doubleslotted but with much less drag to slow down the aircraft on take-off. They were tuned by the Vickers team too, 0 that they also had a high drag character at th landing setting, just like double-slotted flaps but without the take-off drag of that type. Once again, Vicker created something special that was an aerodynamic fi r t. Another first was the design of the leading-edge slats. These travelled or rotated further over an axis (25 degrees) than had previously been thought possible and th rewards were a steep increase on the effi iency graphs. To avoid the wing stalling first at its tips - with subsequent spinning risks - the inboard section of the slat was omitted at the wing root. This balanced any tip-stall effect for only a small trade-off in maximum lift coefficient, which was in itself ab orbed by the wing's overall performance. An outboard wing fence also controlled lift-de troying, performance-decaying, panwise airflow, as did the tall inboard fence that was added for certification. As an added benefit, and despite the T tail and rear-biased aerodynamic, the V 10 offered a good degree of classic nose-drop at the stall. Obviously, the spectre of a nose-up pitch and deep- tall on et

haunted the designer, and achieving such a no e-drop characteristic with such a design was nor easy. Few other T-tailers have managed it. Le er features of the airframe to receive attention aw contributions to the overall aerodynamic performance from the smooth-surfaced window apertures, fairedin wing box, and flush sealing hatches with close panel gaps, all of which add speed and reduce fuel consumption through minimizing drag and turbulent airflow. With its tuned wings, advanced aerofoils, sculptured tail and expertly designed engine installation, the VCIO was highly advanced in terms of aerodynamics. This provided a basis for the aircraft to meet its design parameters and, indeed, to exceed them to the point at which the aircraft had massive, built-in potential. Once again, Vickers had come up with the best, and then added to it. Proof of this came in the form of the VClO 'copy', the Ilyushin 11-62. This Ru sian-built airliner became the only other airframe in the world to boa t a T tail, swept wing and four rear-mounted engines. The circumstances of its similarity to the V 10 make an interesting story, rather like the circum tances of the similarity between the Tupolev Tu-144 and the Concorde. Despite suggestions of intrigue, and suspicion about KGB spie

The so-called 'beaver tail' exhaust modifications to cure backflow and drag (see text).

on each item' potential effect, but on a singular ba is. However, when wings began to have varying degrees of section, sweep, camber and incidence, and ·Iats and flap, it was difficult to predict the characteristics of a wing as a whole entity. For the first time in the 195 s, the work of a Dr Weber at the RAE was crucial to achieving a complete picture in orporating all a pect of wing behaviour. For the V I what wa needed wa a way of setting such parameters before having them to hand as a set, real wing. Vickers aerodynamic t am worked with the Royal Aircraft Establishment, ational Physical Laboratory and the Aircraft Research Association for over six

months. They created a wing that was tuned to be super-critical; it maintained its flow nor just by redUCing the conventional flow eparation, but by actually removing it from its u ual home somewhere along the aerofoil section. Messrs H. Pearcy ( PL) and B. Haines (ARA) were credited with the 'peaky' wing idea and development - 'peaky' referring to the effects of peaks of airflow peed/pressure control - and their wing greatly reduced hock separation and span wise flow. This proved to be so effective on the ultimate Super VCIO that, at certain all-up max weights, the aircraft had to be flown with both aileron slightly pitched up. This created some drag to relieve the bending

70

stress on the wing as it created such superefficient lift. This was to be avoided if po ible, as it caused a significant amount of drag. Despite this 'ole deficiency, the V 10 wing design produced higher lift than it competitors. The VClO's aerofoil design was extremely advanced for it time, repreenting far more of a leap than has ever been publicly recognized. V 10 wings were thu created; they proved to be sup r-efficient at the top end of the speed range, and still worked well at low speed with flaps and slats extended. Given the VC I O's need for short-field take-off performance, i.e. on runways if 6,000 feet or less - rather than those of

77

trying to get hold of the early plans for both aircraft, the resulting Rus ian designs were not successful. Later, an Ilyushin delegation vi ited Vickers seeking help for their aircraft's problems. De'pite looking like the V 10 (albeit without the elegant tail and stance), the 11-62 failed to match the VCI 's performance. The life of the 11-62 l ecame fraught with disaster and there were many fatal accidents in airline service. One of the major problems was with the aerodynamics; the 11-62 was unahle to climh steeply and its take-off resemhled a kind of horizontal linear levitation. The pilots were trained not to expose the wing to any high attack angles. The aircmft was susceptible to the deep stall at even moderate angles of pitch and had to be flown both accurately and carefully. A· a result of this, the Russian design team is reputed to have asked Vickers for help in solving the II-62's handling problem. The II-62's other major problem area was in its engines. The four rear-mounted engines were not mounted in a protective cradle, as they were on the VClO, and control runs were not 0 well designed. ny single engine failure could rapidly affect it· neighbour and then expo e the whole of the rear fuselage to disastrous damage. everal airframe were lost through such circumstances and, sadly, many lives lost.

CHAPTER FOUR

industry, supplied components. The list of their names reads like a history of British industrial achievement: Ward Brooke Ltd, Hobson Ltd, Rist Ltd, Ferranti, Elliot Bros., English Electric, mith, Cossor, Fairey Mallinson, Porter, Thorn, Teddington, ormalair. These great names all contributed to making the VC I great in it elf, and there were many more.

DevelopDlent and Production Work on the definitive VClO began in earnest in early 1957. Vickers recruited for the drawing office and planned a major increase in staff for the beginning of the production run. Liaison with customer airline BOAC - which made clear its need for a 35,0001b payload uplift on 2,500-mile range sectors - was the core of the VC IO's development. The airline made available the details of its routes and, after the first Aight of the prototype Vickers Standard VIIOO G-ARTA at 5.25pm, on 29 June 1962 (two months after roll-out, on 15 April), waited for the production process

to take hold. It then took it own VllOl, G-AR VF ('Victor Foxtrot') on a serie of proving Aights in order to ensure that the recipe worked. BOAC's moustachioed aptain Cane, always impeccably turned out and known for his 'film tar' good looks, commanded the development profile. He had learned much through Aying on G-ARTA with G.R. 'Jock' Bryce, Brian Trubshaw and Bill aims. These pilots were assisted by techni ian/observers Roy Holland, Chri Mullen and Ian Muir. Prior to all this success, the first VCIO, G-ARTA, took shape at Weybridge in the

largest of the hangars. This place wa known to some as 'Cathedral City', reAecting the reverential atmosphere in these massive buildings, as well as their architecture. As all the pressings, millings, fabricated part and systems components came together, a distinct air of anticipation was felt - after all, this would be the largest airliner ever produced in Britain. In fact, excluding the multi-country Airbus, it is still the largest airliner ever produced by one country in Europe. Alongside G-ARTA could be found the VCIO pressure hull test specimen, which

Prototypes and Flight Testing

Messrs Bryce. Cairns and Trubshaw after the first flight of G-ARTA.

till re t today at Brooklands on the Weybridge site. Wing stressing, undercarriage tests, door-sealing experiments and all th fuel-tank work went on a event gathered pace. omponents arrived from Foxwarren (Cobham), Hum, South

BOAC's Captain Peter Cane talks VC1D details from the left hand seat.

72

Marston, Filton, and all the Vickers subites. otably, as one of the first example of Anglo-French collaboration, the milled tail-fin part were hipped in from Sud Aviation's t azair plant. Over 200 companies, mostly from the core of British

73

By late 1961, G-ARTA had started to come together, lying in the factory covered in dull ycllow-hucd anti-corrosion paint, with her tailplane set with an elegant upsweep in the climb position, looking for all the world like some giant beachcd sea creature. With the addition of the dark blue BOAC colour and grey undersides, G-ARTA took on the air of a super-sleek machine, all curves and fins, the like of which had nevcr bcen een before. Many simply stood and star d. They really did believe that this was the future. BOAC's first VClO \\''1' registered GARVA and Aew in m'ember 1962. everal of the aircraft registered G-ARV A through to G-AR VH performed de\·e1opment roles, but it was G-ARVF and G-AR VB that performed the majority of the respective, route-proving and Aighttraining roles. BOAC used G-AR VM as its prcfcrred training machine for somc time. Over the course of thc airframc and routc development changes were made to the aircraft and modifications to operational proccdurcs were carried out. G-ART performed extensive Aight te ting with Truhshaw and Bryce in control and much wa learned. Apart from the usual Aying and performance experiment , G-ARTA was al 0 equipped as a Aying laboratory, with 15 tons of te t instrumentation and 50 mile of cabling to record th certification trial. Much work was done exploring the handling profile and the crucial tall regime. Before moving to the BAC OneEleven, 'Jock' Bryce undertook the early Aying of G-ARTA prior to handing the programme over to Brian Trubshaw. Bryce, a former RAF King Royal Flight pilot with great natural talent for aircraft handling and information assimilation,

DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION

had risen to prominence with his development flying on the Viscount. He then test flew through its entire development the Vickers Valiant bomber - Britain's largest jet bomber that carried a nuclear bomb, and al 0 the main tay of the RAF's AAR flight-refuelling capability for over a decade. During this development period, Bryce survived several 'hairy' moments including an in-flight fire in a wing that caused him and his crew to abandon the aircraft. Through ejecting from the flaming Valiant he joined the 'Caterpillar Club', an exclusive brigade of men who have had their lives saved through ejecting/parachuting from in-service aircraft in dire emergency. Through his work developing the Valiant's flying controls and artificial-feel units, he came to the even larger VCIO with a good idea of what would be needed. Certainly, the methods by which the VCIO's rate of roll and Dutch roll characteristics were analysed and flown stemmed from previous experience with the Valiant. Brian T rubs haw , who became the VC 10 programme's main commander in flying terms, was also a former RAF Kings Royal FI ight pilot. He had known Bryce previously and had established an enduring flying relationship. Trubshaw, later to become famous as the man who took oncorde to the air, had been an ex eptionally rated young RAF pilot who, after changes to the Royal Flight, had been streamed out and identified for a test-piloting role. Having joined up in 1943, he wa by 1949 an RAF special projects squadron pilot. Through various helping hands, he join d Vickers Armstrong in early 1950 under Mutt ummers, who was then Vickers Chief Test Pilot. There, hi rare aircraft-handl ing talent came to the fore, and he would become a senior figure in the worldwide test flying industry. He had carved his niche flying the Vanguard, and also in flying the Valiant Mk2 - the exquisite-looking 'black' Valiant, which was developed for low-level interceptor flying and had it strengthened structure painted in gleaming all-black. From those earlier experiences, Brian Trubshaw developed his core commitment to Vickers aeroplanes, and to George Edwards. uitably equipped, Trubshaw was able to take the V 10 development flying on beyond Jock Bryce's initial VCIO flying, as Bryce went to take over the One-Eleven. In tho e early day, the flying limits of the VC I0 were approached carefully and

the expected parameters of safe handling only explored to about 70 per cent of their estimated profiles. It was a tep-by- tep pro e s of caution. A the aircraft's true handling was confirmed, that percentage of performance exploration wa pushed further and the aircraft was taken up to its limits. Drawing on all his Vickers experiences (notably via the Valiant), Brian Trub haw and his crew went into uncharted territory with the stall regime, but in a safety lead process. Certification of the VC I0 took place on 22 April 1964, after two years of test flying with G-ARTA and G-ARVE.

The Drag Problem In performance terms, a drag and buffet problem was identified during early flights through a degradation in performance expectations. This resulted in the wellknown tweaks to the airframe (see Chapter 3). These included reprofi led Kuchemann tips (giving a 6ft span extension), 'Iat housing re-alignments, altered engine installation (the familiar 3-degree greater incidence to the fuselage datum line being applied to the later 'uper VCIO, but a less critical initial change also being applied to the production VIIOI tandard models), and an inboard wing fence (at 18 per cent chord), plus engine exhaust trimming vane' (the beaver tail fairing). The re-tuned' eddon' airflow step was also incorporated to the rear of the engine stub pylons. Later variants (Type 1102/3 onwards) also featured special wingtips and a wing hord increase as well as vortex generator . Vickers spent a significant amount of money and time inve tigating the drag problem. This included air-to-air photography ofG-ARTA in flight at heights up to 37,000ft at high speed. This showed how specially applied tufts of fibre moved in the localized airflow area. The pictures revealed trong turbulence and backflow - a indicated by the tufts' pattern, around and in between the paired engines' pod - and this led to remedial work, headed by Ron torey at Vickers. Early in these trials, Vickers had to go back to basics to try and find out where the unexpected extra drag was coming from. Before re orting to tuft te ts and expen ive structural alterations, they tested the wing flap and slat housing to see if all was well, with a clean, retracted

74

configuration. This meant taping up the slats and flaps and sealing the gaps between their panels and fairings. Obviously, the aircraft would then have to take off and land with no flap and no lat availabl . This would incur some risks at the higher speeds necessary. nder the command of G.R. 'Jock' Bryce during the first phase of testing, G-ARTA was taken to the long runway at Boscombe Down and taped up and test flown. This helped identify the various areas where airframe re-tuning was needed. Brian Trubshaw was al 0 involved in furthering this work. Development of the airframe went on for years, with G-ARTA working as the development airframe for another three years. Despite the major structural modifications that were worked into the uper V 10, which could not be added to the BOAC Standard models (uch as the chord extension), it was the Type 1102 and Type 1103 airframes that saw the most changes. otable, and often ignored, was the extra work to do with localized airflow behaviour on the leading edges. Whilst most commentators focus on the 4 per cent chord extension and chamfered wingtips, few have recorded the addition of inboard leading-edge fillets and vortex generators with lower surface mini-fences. These were seen on the B A and Ghana Airway airframes, and added to G-ARTA itself when it wa remanufactured to Type I 109 specification. Placed inboard of the shu-equipped wing area, near the wing root, an angled leading-edge fence triggered and tied down a localized airflow improvement effect. Approximately 12in long, these device were effe tive, if undoubtedly an 'add-on' modification. Even more major work wa carried out on the 'peaky' aerofoil section on the uper model VCIO, which could not be applied to the BOA Standards. G-ARTA flew the entire pilot's flying manual ami, in doing so, created that manual for this aircraft. Best climb rates, engi ne rpm percen tage rates, approach profiles, the stall regime and much more, were all part of the V 10 development programme. Over 2,000 stall profiles were flown by G-ARTA, with Brian Trubshaw taking over the flying programme. The BOAC production aircraft also undertook work on the 'autoland' automatic landing programme. imilarly, these aircraft went off down the BOAC route

tandard Model VC10 Four R lis Roycc

Powerplant:

onway Mk540 Lurbofans. 20,400lb (9,250kg) thrust

Dimcn ions Overall length:

159ft in 146ft 2in

pan:

9ft 6in

Height: ross wing arca:

2,932 sq ft

spect ratio:

7.5

weep at

'l.\ ch I'd:

32.5 degrees

Tailplane area:

63 sq ft

Wheelba e:

l65ft 10.5in

Wheel tra k:

21ft 5in

abin Dimen i ns Length:

5ft 6in

Max width:

11ft 6in

Max height:

7ft Sin

Freight hold vol.:

1,412

Accommodation:

Cll

ft

Up to 151 scat

Wcights Max take-off wcight:

312,OOOIb

Max landing weight:

216,OOOlb

Typical operating weight:

147,0001h

Max payload:

39,8001b

Total fllel capacity:

l7,925 imperial gallons

Performance Range with reserves: ruise peed:

4, 00 mile, or 5,040 miles with no reserves 550mph

Take-off distance to screen height 35ft at max I A: L nding run ISA MLW: ote:

,300ft at max load 6,400ft Empty VCIO took off from Weybridge in under 2,

ft!

Total number of flying airframes constructed: 1 airframes, I prototype, then 17 commercial orders delivered, Type Vl100, VIIOI. VI 102/3. Prototype later in commercial service with Lakcr a MEA (Icase), BUA/B AL BOA:

B

AlB AL:

12 airframes, G-ARVA to G-ARVM 3 airframe, G-A IX, G-A IW, G-ATDJ. Latcr 4th airframe G-ARTA

British United and Mr Laker's Cargo Door

Type 1100/09 remanufactured Ghana Airway:

be months before they entered commercial service. The BOA development flights took place with BOAC-liveried aircraft that were still the property of their manufacturer. During this time, many potential snags and early gremlin were worked out and the airframe were thus properly developed prior to being let loose on their pilots and their public. This work reaped rewards - the airline was not burdened with an unknown machine that might be beset with hidden danger. Line and operations staff down the routes were also trained up so that the VC to' service introduction would be as hassle-free as possible. Much was al 0 learned during this period about maintaining the VCIO. Early problems with oil seals, brakes and flap drives were soon sorted out. The development aircraft clocked up over 4,000 hours of flying prior to service entry, during which a nucleu of 75 Captain. 127 First Officers and 72 Flight Engineers were trained for BOA . On entry into service, the V 10 developed the reputation that it was either going to be on time, or very late indeed. In life a in birth, it did nothing by half. During the development period, BOAC also tried several experiment with its livery before settling upon the golden Speedbird theme. There are a large number of photographs d picting varying scheme. The Vicker plants saw a va't increase in workforce during the VC I0 production run and with each airframe departing Weybridge for the flight-test base at Wisley, the Vi kers hub became a veritable shrine to the VC IO. Many of the 10,000-plus workforce were happy to secure rides on the aeroplanes they had designed and built. Through the BOA machines, via the Ghanaian, igerian and BUA craft, to the RAF's VCIOs and into the day' of the BOA and East African Super VC lOs, the Vickers Weybridge plant was the centre of the V 10's excellence.

2 airframes, 9G-ABO, 9G-ABP

and proved the concept under th command of BOA's Captain Rendall as Flight Manager and the control of Captain Cane - the airline's vetO Development aptain - usually with aptains Stoney and Phillips

on board as well. As oflate 1963, G-ARVF flew dozens of flights, notably to Lagos, Kano, Khartoum, and all points south. Many of the BOAC production aircraft were completed by early 1964, yet it would

75

It is clear that BOAC had a certain attitude towards the VCto, so it is interesting to look at the approach of the type' other main customer at launch, for a different view of the airline world. Enter the character of Freddie Laker.

..,.

an inflatable lip mechanism. The vulnerable lower edge to the door opening at it sill was doubly reinforced and plated, a well as having a pop-out rubbing strip. The floor upport tructure was common to the increased bearing strength found on the RAF VCI . The later 'pecial freight floor with a more advanced load structure, designed for the BOAC uper VC I0 freighter, was not part of the B A option becau e of its weight penalty. preaders placed over the floor and lashing points allowed BUA to carry heavy cargoes, incl ud ing Freck! ie Laker's own Rolls- Royce Silver Cloud, which he took on many sales tours. For more on the BUA VC I0 story, see Chapter 7.

The Royal Air Force VCIO

This EAA Super VC10 shows off the cargo door design and the revised engine installation.

At the time of British United Airways' involvement with the VC 10, Freddie Laker (later ir Freddie) was the airline's Managing Director. He had learned the airline busine s the hard way and had gained much in doing so. He had made hi name transporting anything and everything to anywhere and everywhere. Perhap it was from this experience that the idea to use the VC I a a mixed cargo/pa enger airframe came. Whatever, F.A. Laker and British nited wanted to do things with the VC 10 that other did not have the courage even to consider. B A's basic need was for an airliner that could work on long-haul routes, feed its growing BA One-Eleven-based holiday

traffic, and service it Mini try of Defence trooping contracts. Ahove all, BUA wanted to be able to offer cargo capacity in this growing field. learly, the VClO would move B A on from its proppowered Britannia days. Laker envisaged ordering his VCIO with a cargo door that would allow him to mix and match the carrying of pas engers and bulky cargo on the ame flight. It was a ma terstroke that certainly repaid the extra cost that Vickers harged per airframe. Of course, given the V lO's outstanding performance potential, Vickers had long thought about th airframe's ability in thi arena and had designed in the cargo door and cargo

76

system from the airliner's inception. The freight door was cut into the forward left-hand front ide of the V I fuselage and featured an aperture 4in high by 140in long. Apart from a minor infringement caused by the jack, the opening was unob tructed and was hinged along its top edge with the lower edge clamping into the fuselage floor and sidewall sill. The door opened to two position, depending on loading needs. The door was plated to reinforce it and had over-centre locks to strain it into a tight fining po ition so that it could be part of the structure. A torsion bar ensured proper clamping while special saling ensured no pressure hull leakage through

The RAF VCIOs were be~t described as 'hot rods'. They featured the short body of the tandard VC I and thus did not trade performance for capacity, as the longerlodied uper model did. However, they did have the Super VCl 's engines, wings, fin fuel tank and structural enhancements. A ignificant addition was that of an auxiliary (ground) power unit mounted in the tai!cone. The aircraft also had a Hyrat emergency hydraulic generator. The RAF VC IOs were even more over-powered than the standard models and also boosted a cargo door and stronger floor; n"lilitary loads could be carried without floor spreaders. A 9ft refuelling probe was also incorporat d into the airframe. These RAF VClOs were known at their hirth as the VC10 C Mkl (Vickers model VCIO Type 1106) and were manufactured alongside the commercial variants. The first RAF m:1chine (XR 06) started it acceptance flying in May 1966 after a first flight just before Christmas 1965. Much liaison between the RAF and BOA took place during the RAF VCIO pilot training conversion programme, as it did on the maintenance front. Vick rs was justly proud that its large airliner had proved its worth in a military tran port variant. This success had fulfilled the aims of the project, which started in the 195 s as the VlOO military transport and RAF versions of the Vanjet idea. A suitably grand handingov r ceremony of the first RAF Transport ommand VClO was put on at Wisley in July 1966.

For more on the RAF VC10 story, see Chapter 1 ,

The Composite Construction Rudder Few are aware that it was the VC I , not the Airbus A30 /310 types, that pioneered the use of large, load-bearing composite structures in an airliner. In the early days of carbon fibre-based CFC composite construction, the experimental work for its use in aircraft structures took place in Iightly loaded panels. But to have a future, composites had to be appl icable to large-scale structures, so an early experiment saw a major CFC wing experiment on a British Aerospace 125 executive jet. If composites were to make it on to large airframes, they had to endure loads and conditions on a wider scale. Vicker was at the forefront of this technology in the Iare 1960 and chose the rudder of the VCI as a uitable experimental base for composite panel inve tigarion. Through much careful work, headed by British Aerospace Chief tructural Engineer A.W. Kitchenside, based at Vicker~, Weybridge, a serie~ of VC10 rudders (each over 6ft tall) were constructed and fined as single rudders within the VCIO's three-rudder design. In the event of the experimental rudder's failure in flight, two conventional honeycomb alloy rudders would remain. The composite rudders were of a CFC-faced Nomex structure with aluminium alloy mounting structures amid a polysulphide interfray. Uni-dire tiona I tape fibre and resins bonded together the cured structure, which was reinforced with polymide glas composite. A film adhesive (Ciba-Geigy) effected the bonding to the skin. Thus constructed and checked, the first composite-fibre, large-scale, high-load panels on a large airliner entered commercial service on a Briti h Airways VCIO on 10 June 197 . These panels flew until 9 Ocwber 19 , when British Airways retired the aircraft. second rudder flew from 21 February 1979 to 9 Ocwber 19 The first rudder flew 5,635 hours in 1,46 flights with the econd rudder clocking up 4,075 hours in 1,170 flights - both in normal commercial service with no incidents or problems. Detailed examination on removal revealed only surface-paint degradation that had exposed the fastener heads. 0 corrosion, delamination, degra-

77

dation of the composite mix, nor water ingress was found. Subsequent to this successful experiment, a further 3,000 hour. were notched up by a pair of composite rudders on two RAF VCl C Mkl transports. The lessons learned through thi work filtered through to the composite cowlings found on the -5 0 model Lockheed Tritar model airliner and on to the B C One-Eleven composite programme that centred on composite engine stul design. Much of what Vickers/BA learned about composites - their strengths, impact rolerance, load paths, and manufacture, stemming from the early VC I0 rudder and 125 wing experiments - was passed on to the oncorde and irbus projects. The VC I0 had broken new ground in another area. In a similar fa hion, the experimental use of carbon brakes in a ommer ial VC10 paved the way for their usc on Concorde.

VCIO G-AXLR - The RB211 Engine Testbed For reasons thar have always been difficult ro ascertain, the RAF felt able to lease out one of its VCIO C Mkls to RollsRoyce and did not operate it within its own Tran port/ upport Command fleer. In 1969, RAF V 10 registered XR 09 was transferred to Rolls-Royce aero engines and registered G-AXLR. Rolls-Royce needed a large jet transport to flight test its new RB211 high-bypass turbofan engine. The core diameter and fan disc size of the aircraft was such that there was much difficulty in finding an aircraft with an engine-mounting point that allowed ufficient clearance for the engine. The VCIO could act as a willing workhorse - with its high-mounted rear-engine po ition, the massive RB211 could be slung on ro the airframe and not risk sma hing into the ground, as it might have done if it had been hung off the wing of a contemporary type. During the engine tests the RB211 was mounted on the left side of the airframe, the main engine beam being reinforced at great expense to take the higher weight and increased aerodynam ic fronta I area effects. Due to the RB211's rop urface pylon mounting design, as opposed to the VC I 's side arm type stub wing, pecial measures were also needed to mount the engine. All went well and a series of

DEVELOPME T AND PRODUCTIO

proving Aights was initiated. On one of these an inadvertent in-Aight thrust reverser deployment occurred and it wa only through the skill of the team on board that the aircraft was landed safely, using the two right-side Conways that had been left in itu. From 1970 to mid-1972, the aircraft carried out a serie of proving Aight for the new engine. It would go on to power the Tri tar and the 747-200-300 and -400 models in uprated, developed form (the ultimate being the RB211-535 1-1). Rolls-Royce returned the aircraft to the RAF and in 1975 it was Aown into RAF Kemble, where it was set upon by variou' training teams from rescue and antiterrorist agencies in many practice sessions. The remains were used on the fire dump and then scrapped in 1985.

The Super VelO The production uper VC 10 was the result of BOA's realization that the orig-

I

ina! tandard model was not going to be as economic on a seat-per-mile basis on the orth Atlantic run a the later model 707 variants. The point that the tandard VelO was never actually designed for use on such routes seems to have been mi sed by many. Long before the fir t Aight of the tandard model G-ARTA, Vickers and BOAC had talked about a stretch to the fuselage to make the aircraft more economically viable. Vickers knew that its aeroplane had massive performance and capacity reserves within it· basic design and stretching it was never going to be a problem. The Super VC I 0 was a typical Vickers development, with much of the work taking place at Vickers' own instigation. Around this time, Vickers also drew the 265-seater Super VC 10 265 'Superb' model. In 1959, the Vickers team drew up the Super VC 10 speCification to the parameters that they felt would offer the best advantages for the customer airline. This aircraft would be used mainly on long-sector prestige runs between sea-level airports

DEVELOPM - TAD PRODUCTION

with long runways in moderate climatic conditions. The Vickers-proposed Super variant of the V 10 could have carried 212 pa engel's, and, with the addition of small change to the wings and tank, could have been a truly long-range machine. With the unchanged wing, the 212- eater was at the limit of its range re erves; a Aight from London to Lo Angele non-stop was not pos ible and in harsh winter conditions the we tbound Atlantic cro ing needed care. This aircraft was the so-called Super 200, which had a 2 ft fuselage extension and proposed 24,0001b thrust Conways to get it between London and the US Eastern Seaboard gateway airports. BOA decided that, although the stretch added extra seating capacity that was valuable in financial terms, it impinged on the trade-off between performance and range. The airline had concerns about the aircraft's range and asked for a shorter stretch, which would still offer improved economics yet preserve the range and runway performance, allowing

Super VC10 - stability on the approach.

the aircraft also to Ay on African route. Therefore, having a ked for the developm nt of the VC 10 into a true Atlantic airliner type - a requirement that was met by Vi kers - BOAC then altered the concept. The company seemed to want to preserve a dual ability that wa completely at odds with the Atlantic-range stretch mode! it had wanted in the first place! Vickers' plans for meeting the V 10's critic head on with a viable, non-tropical performance 707/DC-8 competitor were obscured. The critics had a field day,

The Rolls-Royce RB2ll test bed VC10 - G-AXLR in flight.

78

and continue to do so: 'If only the VCIO had been properly developed,' they cried. A lack of clarity and understanding once again affected the VC 1O's reputation unjustifiably. As a result of this situation, the shortened version of the real uper 212 VC I0 was created, and the definitive production uper VClO was born. The aircraft carried a 13ft fuselage extension giving a 163- eat capacity with lower seat-mile cost for its owners. The wing de ign was further refined and a new

79

interior was created. The major changes between the tandard V 10 and the urer V ~ 10 were as follows: • 156in fuselage extension • 75in between forward Aight-deck/galley area and main First Class cabin • lin exten ion between centre and rear fuselage sections • Keel member stiffened to take increased bending loads in the structure • Top skin panels stiffened in localized ar as

DEVELOP lENT AND PROD eTlON

Specification -

uper

velO Four Rolls-Royce

Powerplanr:

onway 43 (Mk550) turbofan; thrust

22,500 Ib (10,200kg) External Dimensions pan:

146ft 2in (44.5m)

verall length:

171ft in (52.32111)

Overall height:

39ft 6in (12.04111)

ross wing area:

2,932 sq ft (272.4 sq m)

weep (at quarter chord):

32.5 Jegrees

Tailplane angle/incidence:

T.P.1. + 4 ro -14

Flap ettings:

o to 45 degrees

Cabin Dimensions (excluding night deck) Length:

105ft Oin (32m)

Max width:

11ft 6in (3.51m)

Max height:

7ft 7.5in (2.32m)

Max usable Aoor area:

1.12 sq ft (104.2 sq m)

Max usable volume:

7,850 cu ft (222.3 cu m)

Accommodation Max high-Jensity eatmg:

174 at 3m pitch

Typical seating:

16 Fir t

las, 123 (BOAC) Economy at 34in pitch

Freight and baggage hold volume capacity: 1,842 cu ft (52.16 cu m) Weights

G-ARVK skims into Brooklands/Weybridge to land on the 4,200ft runway.

• Increased metal gauge in wing to wheel-well area • trengthened landing-gear side-stay frame • Main landing-gear beam reinforced • Curvature changes to panels to accommodate the stretch • Forward galley and ervice doors repositioned • Forward amenitie re-arranged • Electrical bay changes • rew toilet moved • Smaller navigator' station • Rear freight door moved • Rear passenger door placed aft of the main wing • Fin fuel tank with piping and tiffened fin plates with tank beneath of 1,350

imperial gallons capacity • Ram air intake in fin to force-feed the tank • Wing ribs strengthened • Upfloat capacity on ailerons to reduce bending stress due to weight and wing increases • Uprated Conway 43 engines • ace lies tilted up by 3 degrees • Four thrust reversers Thus equipped, the first uper model VCIO took to the air on 7 May 1964 and entered ervice just over a year later, at the b ginning of 1966. Registered GASGA, she was the first of seventeen uper VClOs for BOA , which culminated in G-ASGR being delivered in

80

1969. For a ti me, the later-model Type 1151 upers were to have the cargo door, but BOAC changed its mind. In doing so, it walked away from the chance to set the combi-convertible cargo/passenger trend that had been started British United, which the like of KLM made their own in the 1970s and Os. The fact that BOAC then ordered cargo door-equipped 707336 models wa another twist to the plot. The blue- and gold-liveri d BOAC Super VClO was a smash hit and BOAC flew the aircraft on a world premier tour to the U A and beyond after a series of proving fl ight. The first of these took place on 7 March 1965 using G-A GO, which also proved the BOAC winter route

Basic operational:

156, 281b (71,13 7kg)

Total fuel:

154,nOlb (70, I 1kg)

Max payload:

5 , lnlb (26,3 6kg)

Max take-off:

335,0001b (l51,958kg)

Max landing:

237,0001b (107 ,505kg)

Performance onnal high-speed cruise:

505h (936 kph)

L ng range economy crui e:

476kts ( 82 kph)

Average approach speed (at weight):

137kts (225 kph)

Take-off field requirements

I A ilea level9,220ft (2,810m), I A plus 15 degrees

(at max weight):

The Trident wa de ervedly given much publicity for its role in the development of automatic blind landing, but it is a lesser-known fact that the VCIO also had a hand in this technology. Vickers (as BA ) worked to create a blind-landing system that wa ultra-reliable and could bring an airliner down to a safe runway touchdown in visibility of true blindlanding category standard. Category llA

6,460ft (1,969m)

ote: Much horter take off distances for non max weight take offs umbers Type Vl151

uper VCtO BOA

Autoland

10,120ft ( ,085m), I A at 5,oooft (1,524m) elevation 11,2 Oft (3,4 Om)

Landing di tan e at max weights:

to the Caribbean via ew York. This flight was overseen by aptain orman Todd and proved invaluable in ascertaining cruise-level, power-setting and routing parameters. A second fl ight under the command of Captain Tom toney - again using G-A GO - took place on 14 March and it was thi flight that was the publicly premiered launch of the VC 10. The A me ricans' comment was, 'She's a beauty.' The fir t scheduled flight took place soon after, on I April 1965, when GA GO, wearing the short-lived BO CCU ARD livery, left Heathrow for New York JFK. With its new interior and enhanced grace - it was longer and sleeker than the shorter tandard model - it became the aircraft to see and he seen in. It was a high-class act, and Ross winton, latterly the highly respected head of the airline, made ure that high-class fittings and services went on to it. Flying it became a Blue Riband experience of excellence across the Atlantic. The aircraft and its crew, developed the sam sort of team spirit that the tandard VC10 had inspired on the Africa division. In the uper variant, a new VC I0 had been born. The strong and sleek workhorse of the Empire routes had turned into a high-performance, h igh-Icvel cru iserj the uper VCIO was the large t airliner in the world at the time, and the superior airl iner of its age. The only other uper VCIO cu tomer was East African Airways who e five superbly liveried machines served the airline for sev ral glorious years from the launch airframe 5X-UV of 1966 through 5Y- DA, 5H-MMT, 5X- VJ and the last ever VCIO to leave Vickers, 5H-MOG which erved from 197 to 1977. All of which had the forward cargo door. (Fuller detail can be found under the EAA heading.)

G-A GA to G-A

R: 17 con tructed

Type V I 154 uper VC I0 EACC: 5 con tructed

87

DEVELOPME T AND PRODUCTION

conditions that made the system really valuable. (In contrast, on the short-haul operations in fog-covered, rain-Ia hed, cross-windswept northern Europe, the Trident' autoland ystem was in regular demand.) In fact, only five airfields on the uper V 10 network had IL y tems capable of feeding the advanced narure of the air raft' autoland ystem. It was not deemed economically viable to keep the uper VC I0 autoland system in ervice and by the m id-1970s it had been phased out - more a victim of the ease of the routes flown, rather than any technical failings.

lrDarn [Pffi®®rn~@rnoo® WDOJL ~®lrD@rn

Further Developments and What Might Have Been Stretching

'oJ

SUPER

V.C.lO

GENERAL

ARRANGEMENT.

The definitive Super VC1D plans.

was first achieved, with Category ilIA certification following several years, and much development, later. From 1967, the uper VCIO was equipped with the autOland facility developed by BA and the Elliot company, with the facility first earning commercial

revenue in 196. The development aircraft was BOAC's GGG, which made hundreds of autoland, auto-coupled approaches. The development had cost a lot of money and, in reality, the Super VCIOs only occasionally encountered the sort of

82

The VC 10's basic design was so over-engineered, and it power ratings were so high, that it was easy for Vickers de igners to come up with airframe developments that were highly advanced for their time. Although these ideas did not become reality, some of them reappeared elsewhere many year later, once again underlining the depth of talent at Vickers. The tandard VCIO airframe was stretched into the uper ver ion with ease. In fact, the uper VCl 0 airframe produced was smaller than the original 212-seat stretch of the Standard, and smaller than the double-decked 265-seater VCIO that was perhaps the ultimate development idea - the Super VCIO 'Superb' model. In view of the ease of this modification, the further developments are not as surprising as they might have seemed at the time. The Boeing 707 could only be stretched so far, there was a limit to the length the fuselage could be extended and the undercarriage could not really be reconfigured for higher gros weights beyond a certain level. The engine size wa al 0 limited by the 1011'- lung nature of the wing-pylon design. The Dougla DC-S had far more inherent flexibility de igned into it. The basic -30 model' fuselage eventually became tretched by a massive amount and the long undercarriage legs and nosedown stance of this model meant that any aft-end lengthening could be accommodated without risking a tail scrape from even the slightest over-rotation. When turned into the -60 series models, and even the big fan-engined -70 models, the

B.

a.A .

(

BRITISH AIRCRAFT CORPORATION ONE HUNDRED PALL MALL ROYAL

AERO

CLUB

GAZETTE

14

VC1D advertising.

83

LONDON SW1

ENGLAND JANUARY

1964

DEVELOPME T AND PRODUCTION

THE

AUG. 1963

ROYAL AERO CLUB GAZETTE

SHELL AND BP AVIATION SERVICES (operaled In the U.K. by Shell·Max and B.P. Ltd)

VCIO pre-launch publicity.

VCIO press publicity.

84

85

DEVELOPME 'T AND PRODUCfIO

DEVELOPM

T AND PRODUCTION

This is the view to the front.

Forward galley.

DCairframe was highly flexible although it did need a completely new engine-pylon design. It.-built growth potential and greater dihedral in the wings allowed it to become the fir t of the 200seat airframes that were called 'J umbo' until the 747 established itself as the only true 'Jumbo'. The 707, even in -300 and 400 models, could never really match the DC- long-bodied, long-range variants, which became hugely popular. One aircraft could have given the longbodied DC-8s a run for their money, and this was one that was designed in the very early 1960s. That aircraft was the longrange development of the VClO. In May 1962, Vickers (SAC) presented their proposals for a refinement of the Super VC I0 that had already been created around the tandard V 10 airframe. At the time, this uper model had yet to fly, although this would happen ju tone month later, on 29 June 1962.

LRll, LRI2 and the 'Superb'

(Above) The BOAC Super VC1D interior (Economy Classl. (Below) The later British Airways refit saw overhead bins installed and new decor panels - notably in First Class, shown here, looking rearwards.

86

The ultra long-range propo al were known as LR/I and LR/2 and are not to be confused with the 'Superb' or V 10 265 model variant of the VCto. This wa a 265- eater and a greatly enlarged, double-de ked, uprated powerplant development of true 'Jumbo' dimensions that incorporated major structural changes and expense.

87

DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCfIO

The simpler, more viable LR/I and /2 are often overlooked, yet they contain some interesting design features. The LR model were created to extend the capability of the existing uper VCtO payload range proposals - taking the aircraft up to a 24, OOlb payload on a non-stop flight from London to Los Angele (LHR-LAX). The existing uper VCI maximum takeoff weight went up from 322,000Ib to 330,00 Ib for LR/l and 342,0001b for LR/2, with fuel capacity rising to 163,00 Ib and 167,0001b respectively. One of these variants was created around a theme of enlarging the uper VCIO airframe without the need for structural changes (and great expense) - there was no weight penalty. The other allowed for some minor tweaking of the airframe in a manner that both Boeing and Douglas would mimic several years later. Inherent in the creation of the LR variants was the realization that the re-engined, big-fan 707s, with their lighter all-up weights and thinner gauge tructures, would be able to fly direct long-haul Atlantic flights between the undemanding, low-level airports of London, Los Angeles, an Francisco and other Pacific coast and mid-western de tinations. A II d1ese places were equipped with long runways. In order to achi ve this, even in winter on the hostile west-

East African used exotic safari murals in its Super VelO interiors.

The safari themes extended to both cabins.

Forward galley detail.

88

89

D PRODUCTION

The original plans for the Super model VC10 included these wingtip or 'slipper' fuel tanks.

_=="--:-..:;--t-----t----......,-------i"'1500-2000·

CATEGORY mA

AUTOMATIC TOUCHDOWN SEQUENCE

i ~

vefO

AlL WEATHER LANDING PROGRAMME LEADI G DIMENSIONS

LIMIT Of CAT. n M.D.A. Length OverOlU

----------

----+-------t-----r------t--------t-----------j------+--=:;;=...;;~-=--~=~;;;;;;.;;;:~--

I

~~~ G~~C:~F,J

~~~~K CHANGE OVER

,r

(SUBSEQUENTlY RE-ENGAGE NO 1 A.pl

AI I HAPS. SPEED. r

I

DATA SOURCES FOR AUTOMATICS

I

_J

---

I. loS. LoCALisER

l.loS. Gli DE

--

DATA SOURCES FOR PILOT

r

-. -

,

-

,

,

'

-,

-

- -

-

-

--

..

~HEcK PHA~E

--

-

--

~ -

FlASHES-

,

---- t - - .

- -

-

ROLL OUT GUIDANCE CAT. mB

2,800 IIq. ft.

T.. ilp4ne lr Elevoltor

645 sq. ft.

Fin & Rudder

586 aq. ft.

MAIN UNDERCARRIAGE

-

4 Wheel B081e

...... --- ---i

-1 -

Wheel"" Tyre abe 50 x 18_20

Typ~

Pre.sure at MJox. A. U. W. 135 p.

•••

-

~

-+

PILOT TAKES OVER CAT.mA

-- -

-

,

••

-'

--

-~

-

CHECK PHASE

--

AUTOMATIC

HARE PHASE

_---

Mainplane I

PHASE

=

14b It.

TOUCH DOWN

~TTITUDE HOle

•••••••••••••• •••••••

--

,

-

I

I

-

-

I

GlID1E SLOPE PHASE

Span

tn.

bin.

GROSS AREAS

THROTTLES I START CLOSING

-'-

,

SLOPE' STORED ATTITUDE RADIO ALTIMETER , AIR DATA SYSTEM THROTTlE CLOSE SIG~~ c_ _ _ ,MANUAL _~E_CRAB_ _ _

FLIGHT I.l.S LOCALISER DIRECTOR I.l.S GlID(~~~ SITUATION DISPLAY:EQUIPMENT STATE MANOEUVRE LIMITS HARE ARM SEQUENCE ATTITUDE HOLD INDICATOR ~.LLARE INITIATE __ THROTTLE CLOSE VISUAL CONTACT WITH RUNWAY

I

-. TRACK PHASE

RUNWAY

FADEOUT OF GliDE SLOPE TO ATiiTUDE HOlD

AUTO FLARE SYSTEM ARMED

186 ft. II 39 flo

Height

~OSE

Twin

I.

7 1.

UNDERCARRIAGE Whe~l

Wheel & Tyre dz.e 39 x 13

Pre.sure

~t

t

gG"""'''''''''''''''=======~~====='''''''S===''''9~

Md.x. A. U. W. 100 p .•. i.

-

,

CAL n

CAT.mA

•

M.D.A.'100

M.D.A.'O

RVR,400 METERS

RVR,200 METERS

The Autoland parameters.

The VC10 Super 200 - note the larger doors and extended fuselage.

90

91

The double-decked 'Superb' model proposal for 265 seats - double-bubbled fuselage and re-shaped nose contours.

PAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS PRESmrATION NEW YORK 1960 THE VICKERS SUPER V.C.10 PASSENGER TRANSPORT AND FREIGHTER VARIANTS

A presentation is made of the economic, operational and engineering suitability of the Vickers' Super V.C.10 passenger transport and freighter variants to Pan American World Ain'/ays. These aircraft are presented in relation to the requirements defined during the recent series of discussions between PAA and Vickers. This presentation is preceded by a short review of the resources and background of experience behind these aircraft. The main technical content of the Vickers presentation to PAA is reproduced here in book form for ease of reference and record purposes.

One of BAC's re-touched photos depicting the Super VC10 200-seater model. CIVIL AIRCRAFT DEVELOPMENT GROUP VICKERS-ARMSTRONGS (AIRCRAFT) LTD

bound ector to the Pacific Seaboard, the Super VCLO LR/variants would n ed to carry more fuel. This led Vickers Advanced Projects Office to come up ~vith two commercially attractive VCtO airframe derivative. LR/L achieved it range increase by remembering an idea that wa originally dreamed up for the long-range Viscount. It involved the installation of extra fuel tank in the freight/luggage holds, which could be easily removed or fitted, and

which left only the basic essentials of extra piping in situ when not in use. ylindrical fuel tanks could be fitted and increase the capacity payload for a mixed-class 123-seat layout by 14,0001b in winter flying onditions, and by 1 ,0001b in summer condition . Even higher payload could be u ed if a refuelling top was incorporated, but that seemed to defeat the object of creating a non-stop airframe in the first place. In view of this, LR/2 was presented and its novel method of creating extra

92

tankage, at minimum structural expense, was clever indeed. It achieved a winter payload of 20,0001b between LHR-LAX, with a fuel requirement of 167,0001b at a maximum take-off weight (TOW) of 342,000Ib. To achieve this, the structure had to be beefed up in the wing, fu eIage- keel/wi ng- box/u ndercarriage areas and brake capacity increa ed. nlike the LR/l, which was ea ily modified, the LR/2 suffered a small weight penalty, however, it tankage and range

-

WEYBRIDGE

-

SURREY

-

ENGLAND

The rarely seen contract proposal between Pan American Airways and VickersArmstrong for the Super VC10 - with two-crew cockpit and extended range.

trade-off did make this worthwhile. By using the freight-hold cylindrical tank, and adding external wing-root tank mounted at the trailing edge of each wing - in place of the wing box to fuselage fairing void - a fuel uplift of even greater proportions was created. The wing-root tanks

added 500 gallons to the combined tankage of the main wing (L7 ,93 gallons) and fin (1,312 gallon ), of the standard airframe and to the capacity of the removable freight tanks (750 gallons forward tank, 375 gallons, aft tank). This created for LR/2 a total tankage of 20, 75 gallons

93

(167,000Ib) and the range to carry a full load non-sto[ on the great circle route to and from London and the American West - a vital profit centre of increa ing importance at the time. aclly, both these highly flexible VCI0 airframe derivative were rejected by B AC. The irony is that, if they had been accepted, they them e1ve would have been of minor relevance compared with what they could have led to. If only ome confidence had been shown, a fascinating box of trick could have been opened. Another derivative that also I' quired a leap of courage was the Super VC I0 variant named the 'Superb'. This used a basic uper VCLO airframe, but created a double-bubble fuselage with a large lower-deck passenger cabin that brought the overall eat capacity up to 265 eats - a true 'J umbo' jet of the age. However, as with the advanced VCl -ba ed triple-fuselaged flying trimaran- tyle 45 - eat airliner that the Vickers Advanced Project ffice came up with in 1964, funding was not forthcoming, and the project died.

The Pan American Super VelD Vickers also made propo als to the Pan American Airways company in 196. The e were not ju I' paper dreams, but were ba ed on real possibilitie . By thi time, Vickers had achieved the unthinkable, by breaking in to the domestic American airliner market, with the Viscount. People had said it could not be done (just as they said to irbus Industrie two decades later). Yet the Viscount did it (as did ud Aviation's Caravelle). If the mcricans would buy the Vi count, why not the V L07 Vickers created a VC to for the Americans and travelled to New York in 196 to present the airliner to Pan Am. It was a bold move with a bold aeroplane. The story of the specially designed 'Pan American V 10' of 1960 is not commonly known. After a number of discussions, Vickers and Pan American, or PAA as it was more frequently known at the time ('PA AM' came later), had created an outline profile of a VCL for Pan American's needs. Above all, the airline needed a pre tige jetliner for its own longrange transcontinental, coast-to-coast s rvice in the U A, and for it own Blue Riband transatlantic services to Europe. Pacific route needs were also discussed.

DEVELOPME TAD PRODUCTION

DEVELOPMENT AND PROD (lION

'-

--1 ••

_

0A

Early Super VelO thoughts included tip tanks.

SUPER V.C.IO GENERAL ARRANGEMENT Of greatest focus were Pan American's routes out of New York to London, Paris, Rome, Lisbon and Frankfurt. Pan American wa looking for a 200-seat airliner with easy, west-to-east capability and confident east-to-west performance for non-stop operation in all bur the most severe winter condition. A onestop-refuelling landing was still the norm if the average Atlantic headwinds of 60 knot rose up to a 100 knot -plus performance-sapping chill on the airliner's nose as it ploughed westward over the Atlantic. Pan American also needed a giant jetpowered freighter for its cargo division, as did many other household name, which also boasted notable cargo operations, including KLM, JAL, Lufthansa and Qanta. Vickers came up with a pure cargo-version freighter VCIO for Pan

American, based on the VC I0 F4 design that the British company intended to market worldwide. This aircraft's main claim to excellence was the very safe, very low landing speed it offered at the high I::mding weights that cargo operations impose above the passenger-carrying norms. Vickers also offered the choice of a side cargo door, or a straight-through, swing-nosed VC 10. This version would have revolutioni:ed the speed of cargo handling through its design and use of cargo-boarding piers ba ed upon the same principle as the passenger-hoarding piers or jetways. This made the mo t of palletized loading and pecially shaped containers integrated with loading and off-loading of trucked-in freight. The swing-nose VC 10 made use of Vickers' naval experience of split- and swing-wing structures for carrier-borne aircraft. On

94

top of this, the nose-loading VCIO featured loading along the axis of the aircraft' wheelbase - avoiding the need for propping the airframe through overbalancing during loading/unloading. new floor featured roller-bearing loading slides. It was heady stuff in comparison with the 7 7 freighter, which did not exist at the time! For it version of the VC I for Pan American, Vickers made the most of the clean wing, superb runway performance, the re erves of handling and safety, as well as the unrivalled low noise levels in the ca~ in. Common to both the pa senger and cargo variants was a developed RR Conway engine labelled the 'Conway 7', which offered 24,OOOlb of thrust. By coincidence, the VC I0 also had an American-designed cabin, with an interior deSigned by Butler of New York, as original specification.

, --

~

THE SHAPE OF THE FUTURE

~:~.

The Pan Am proposal included tip tanks and the extended root fillet leading-edge area increases shown in this plan view. Note the 'Shape of the Future' legend.

Perhap' the most intriguing aspect of the Pan American VC I was the fact that the leading dge of each wing was changed to incorporate a root extension fillet to provide increased wing area and more tankage. (The LR/2 had tanks on the rear trailing edge.) Also, it is clear from some early Vickers advert for the VCIO, the airframe

included wingtip fuel pod that were not dis imilar to those een on the Comet 4. Thus equipped, the Pan American VClO carried a fuel load of 20,625 imperial galIon (24,750 US gallons). The accommodation offered great flexibility, with room for 196 Economy or, in the US term, 'Coach' passengers at a

95

comfortable 33in pitch. An alternative layout at the other extreme was 54 in four-abreast, 42in pitch First Class and, behind them, 7 in a comfortable ixabreast, 34in pitch Economy ection. E pecially for Pan American, Vickers came up with the novel idea of a small underfloor compartment that could be used as a passenger lounge or a crew rest area. A short stairway led down to this exclusive cubby hole from the front fuselage area. The idea was rather along the same Iines as the lower-deck lounge of the tratocruiser and later manifested itself as a far larger, lower-deck cabin on the uper VC I0' uperb' model. Another economic advantage of the Pan American VCIO was that it was designed for operation by on ly two fI ight crew with a third engineering and systems manager stationed behind the o-pilot. The BOA Empire Route navigator, third officer and others were dispensed with. A two-crew cockpit in [960 was yet another example of Vickers fore ight, as wa the 'glass' CRT-screened VClO cockpit instrumentation that Vickers also worked on at this time. Although it never happened, the Pan American VCIO was a serious proposal. A contract was drawn up, a copy of which remains in the archive at Brookland. (see illustration on page 93). An internal Vickers memo dated 2 October 1960, from Vickers Commercial Manager to Geoffrey Knight, Vickers Sales Manager in the USA, also confirms the seriousnes of the proposal. It refers to how the deal would progress and advises that Vickers should, 'Ignore the basic price and go for a fixed price and delivery date.' Such confidential document prove that Boeing was not necessarily the automatic choice for ai rl iners at the ti me. Vickers offered Pan American a fleet of airframes for pa senger and cargo use with shared facil itie and design parameters that advanced the standards of pa enger comfort, safety, cargo handling and airfield performance, far beyond those to which that airline was accustomed. Operating the Pan American i:ed VC 10 tretched airframe with developed engines worked out at an all-in eat/mile cost of 2. 3 dollar (average) with 2.59 dollars on a 4,000-mile stage length. These highly competitive figure rose only to 3.45 dollars on a 500-mile stage length. The Pan Am VClO was destined to remain a paper aeroplane. Yet, like other

DEVELOPME T AND PRODUCTION

(Above Left) Nigeria Airways VC1D.

(Above Right) Middle East Airlines VC1D on approach. This is the leased Ghana machine.

The Short-Haul VC1D painted in BEA customer colours.

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

VClO derivations, its design and variations were the key to securing Britain a role in the world market for large aircraft from 1960 to 1980. A Letter of Intent signed between Vickers and United Airlines for a fleet of all-cargo VClO T4s, and similar letters with Eastern and T AA of Australia, further indicate the potential that was won and lost. As had happened so often in the VClO story, such excellence and opportunity were cast to the winds of history.

(Left) A rare air-to-air of the Air Malawi VC1D 7Q-YKH.

The Short-Haul VelD The VClO airframe had massive performance reserves inherent in its design parameters. In June 1966, therefore, the BAC Project Office proposed the shorthaul version of the VClO. Some conf~sion exists about this. There were, in fact, two main short-haul VClO proposals in the post-production life of the aircraft. Seen here are the details of the 221-/230-seat, long- bodied, short-winged, 'Airbus'-standard, Short-Haul VClO. Another version was the VCll - an 80- to nO-seater that resembled the Vanjet of a decade before.

Plan for the Short-Haul VC1D - note the clipped wings and extended fuselage.

96

The serene safari. EAA Super VC1D in the cruise.

. ,

.

,.

----

'14

--~

(Above) A rare view shows the Conway engine installation on MEA's OD-AFA.

(Left) What might have been - are-touched BAC shot of the proposed Super 200 variant.

British United Airways VC10 G-ASIW displays the airline's later colours.

(Left) An ex-EAA VC10 displays the wing pods and lower fuselage HDU refuelling points, plus tailcone APU.

(Below) A superb view of one of the RAF tanker conversions flying high.

Super VC10 world premier flights. This is JFK, with Constellations and the rival 707 in the background.

(Above)

The Super VC1D displays its true elegance.

(Right) The VC1D prototype G-ARTA runs up her engines for the first time. (Left)

The clean wing is shown well in this view.

(Top)

Roll-out of the prototype. (Above)

later days - one of the British Airways Supers sweeps in.

(Left) (Below)

A VC1D C Mk 1 now modified to K standard and used for VIP flights. seen with the Brize Norton terminal in the background.

VC1D with the four Conways at full thrust - cover your ears! (Below)

Gulf Air VC1D in full house colours.

(Right) Building the VC1D; a rare colour view of the construction process.

(Below) An unmarked Super VC1D shows off the type's elegant stance.

(Above) BOAC's queen of the fleet Super VC1D about to touch down.

(Right) A classic view of the RAF VC1D type.

(Left) The all-important Flight Engineer's panel. Note the duplicated throttles, the engine vibration meters and the fuel tank and feed system/transfer gauges.

(Below) A4D, the Omani machine, climbs out. (Below) The command post. The Super VC1D flight deck from the First Officer's seat.

DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION

SOl

""

-ST ..

STlI

I

_-I

'\

\

'

" \" I:, '~

HIGH DENSITY - 230 SEATS AT 3Z" PITCH

, (iI

5tQUl1t WllmI

•

.

"..., (Above Left)

HIGH DENSITY LAYOUT

.

SECTION ON 'A-A' 'c-c'

SECTlOtIlIlI ',.,'

The standard VC1D flight deck, updated for the Omani Royal Flight. Note the wire across the windscreen posts, which was added to all VC1Ds as a horizontal perspective aid to pilots.

ST•.

11705 t.SUTItA'LS

(Above Right) The later British Airways Super VC1D First Class cabin.

\, I '~

ECONOMY ClASS-ZZI SEATSAT H·PITCH

ECONOMY CLASS LAYOUT (Left and Below)

Seat plans for the Short-Haul VC1D.

The Sultan of Oman's VIP VC1D interior,

• The VCll, proposed in 1966, and part of a presentation to TCA in Canada and NCA in New Zealand, had its origins in the early Vanjet predecessors; Vickers veterans confirm this. The 221-/230-seater aircraft was the most interesting. The forerunner of the 'Airbus' standard of configuration, although targeted at European markets, it could also appeal in the USA and Asia. Just as Douglas had done successfully with the DC-S and DC-9, the VClO was stretched, its wingspan shortened and its range curtailed to provide passenger payload, not ultimate runway performance, The wings were chopped by nearly 20ft via a 15ft 2in curtailment - thus reducing fatigue and stress, and extending spar life

despite vastly increased take-off and landing cycles. The proposal was for 221 seats at a very comfortable 34in pitch in a oneclass cabin that could take 230 passengers on ultra short-haul routes at a less comfortable 32in pitch. Payload was 44,000Ib, even at an airfield at 6,000ft elevation. The cabin doors were enlarged for a fuselage that had a major extension forward of the wing. A three-crew cockpit was planned. The engines were tweaked Conway 43s with six corrugation silencers. Ramp weight was 257,000Ib. A Bristol Siddeley Artouste 520 auxiliary power unit, or APU, provided ground-based start-up capability. Reduced thrust settings of only 17,500lb could be used to extend engine life - a reduction of nearly 4,0001b

97

of thrust demand in normal service Iife at normal level airfields. Using the 2l,5001b full power setting created a nO-seat airliner with a 1,000-mile range carrying a 44,0001b payload from any runway, even a 'hot and high' one. Category 3A autoland was included, which was ideal for intraEuropean operations. This airliner also had the first use of flexible galleys that could be easily moved, and created the one-class commuter-style cabin. The main payload-to-range arenas for the ShortHaul VC10 were the 400-mile to 1,000mile sectors. Such were the reserves in the VC10 airframe that, even with the fuel-thirsty Conways (albeit operating at reduced power), the Short-Haul VClO was a very

DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION

Approach speed graph for the short·haul VC10.

SHORT HAUL ~®

APPROACH SPEED

, APPROACH SP EEO knots.

:: :::: .> .: :.: . :::: .• /V,; .i::, / >: f:,,:'··:·.'·· ---< .• ;:"::.',: ...• / •. :. ::

. '."'

120

.: •. ,

!,

:;'7

,:.:+.....:':!.,. ·'i ':- j':·-'+,·:···'i-- ·.;...-r·':~'·i,:·"i··' ,·,·,·:··"i-:·'-::·H 'F"': !.,.: +:'·F:'-:i':':+·:···'·1 :! :: .

://.: ' .•'.';.".'..': .... / :...+/.

•. :'

lIc>-I·:·. '-" .

.. ' :

. 1,· 160

:,.,

.•.• , ....c.•.•i

":

'j: !'!,'

.:.'.,

,

::

'j

.

:

..::'

.:. '.

...... '-i.":.",-:.f':.'...:.,.•.,..•'.•. c•.,... _,..• ··.--·H ::....;.-:.• , ...,.,..•.,...;..-.::'••·....···.·-.-.,.•.;·.. ··.-1

.. ...

. ' h : :.

'.

;';

200

180

220

240

1.000 lb.

WEIGHT -

SHORT HAUL ~lXQ) cheap airframe to operate. With 230 seats on offer. it was very competitive economically. BAC presented it as the '3 dollarsa-mile airliner', in reference to its seatper-mile cost at the time. In fact, it could operate at 2.52 per scat-mile in some configurations. The Short-Haul VCLO could have been applicable anywhere. For BEA, or perhaps even KLM, it would have been a major player on European routes such as London to Paris, Amsterdam to London, or Frankfurt to Amsterdam. Ln the Asian market, the aircraft would have been ideal for routes between Hong Kong and Bangkok, or Singapore and Jakarta, while in Australia, short hops such as Sydney to Brisbane or Melbourne would have been its forte. With its reserves of airfield performance, the Short-Haul VC10 could carry a decent load from any aidield, whatever the operating conditions. Despite the stretch and increased weights, it still exceeded the performance of competing airliners. For the Americans, its capabilities on routes out of Denver or Los Angeles to the Mid-West or Deep South would have been immense. It is no surprise that the BAC (Vickers) brochure for the Short-Haul VC10 mentions such routes

FREIGHTER

NORTH ATLANTIC LOAD FACTORS

BRITISH AIRCRAFT CORPORATION LA.T.A. OPERATORS 707 & DCB COMPARED WITH B.O.A.C. SUPER VC 10 100

90

0 zO au

80

SUP R ve

--

go:

a: o

...

70 I

.

60

o

so

u

~

/,

u..

«

-'

.

40

C>

a: w

---

v/ ......-",

o

w

~~ ~"'

10 " "

,

,,

r',->~

Brochure for the VC10 Freighter.

).\,

f - - ./"

V

......-"'''

i'''

.--

/

SUPE APPE

vela PASSE GER LAD ANTA( E

\\-- i,

'"

""

"-', \ .-, r"·,,~ -'. . . --? V / '\; ..... 1.7f .

-

...

AVER i'GE C f

/4

lAT.

.~ v. ....

30

-

~

I,

.;'-'

,

"

>


B.O.A.

. eo

BINE

/

SER

11"'" / ICES

20

10

o

JAN.

FEB.

MAR.

APR,

MAY.

JUN.

JUL.

AUG. SEPT. OCT,

1965 -

NOV. DEC.

JAN.

FEB. MAR.

APR, MAY

1966

BAC sales pitch! The VC10 advantage in customer terms.

98

and highlights the aircraft's abilities between ew York and Washington and Chicago and Miami. Sadly, once again, the backing to develop the aircraft and the prospect for a revised powerplant were both lacking, and this put paid to the short-haul variant of the VCIO. However, there is no doubt that it encompasses the core ideals of an 'Airbus'-type concept. Perhaps the supreme irony in the fate of the ShortHaul VClO was the fact that in L967 it nearly came back to life when BAC proposed an 'Airbus'-standard short-haul airliner called the BAC 'Two-Eleven'. A hybrid of the remains of the VC LO and the BAC One-Eleven, this airframe almost terminated the development Anglo-European Airbus - the government would hardly support both airliners.

The Two-Eleven (2-11), in fact, died a death. What is ironic is that the Two-Eleven was due to be powered by two RB.211 engines in one variant, and three such engines in stretched 'Three-Eleven' (3-11) form. These themes compare with the original Vanjet ideas and the plans for Vickers' own Airbus type. This featured the VClO wing, a developed two-deck fuselage (as in the VC10-265) and four Con ways prtired under each wing, and had a conventional tail fin and elevator design that looked very much like the one that finally adorned the actual Airbus. With two big fan engines under the wing to replace the Con ways, this aircraft's silhouette would have been identical to the A300. The greatest irony, however, is that this aeroplane featured a double-deck passenger cabin, just like the

99

one on the double-deck Airbus 3XX 'Jumbo' proposal for that firm's biggestever project, announced in 1998.

velD F4 Nose-Loading Freighter With the addition of a side cargo door to the BUA airframes, the VCtO created the mixed passenger/cargo concept, later marketed as the 'combi' formula by Boeing. With the advent of the reinforced floor with cargo-handling trim for the RAF's versions of the VCtO, it looked as though tbe most had been made of the VC10's potential, In fact there was more to come. The third VC10 freighter development was the VC10 F-3, which was an all-cargo, side-loading airframe carrying a maximum freight payload of 80,OOOIb at an all-up weight of 330,OOOlb.

_

________

~D~E~-V~-~OP ~~~~~~~~~----------------

DEVELOPME _ _ _TAN _ D PROD CTIO

ELOPMENT AN D PRODUCTION

~L=-:-:----­

FREIGHT LORRY WITH OADING USING

PLA~~g~~OPERATED

PALLETS ON VEHICLELOADING

:r=~~~~~~~

ROLLER

__ VC10 side-load in g I relghter " sketch"

==:=~~Jt:;;:~~~:u;~, ;, ~-~ ·-: -: ~: -:,: :~:,: ; ;t-;~·~r~:~1[- - -I----1 'CA"O'"

r -----

ii-

_ _ __ ~'-__ _ _ __ _ _ II _ _ _ JL_ II

An alternative 10 ad"109 Idea. "

CD

Another view sh ows the h" mge design in closer detall"

-)

c

I

'.""pl

v. C10

FREI GHTE"R (NOSE LOADING)

~ICKERS

y'"C.10 FREIGHTER NOSE HINGEING

II

""'A'" BAC devised th"IS dockmg " system to speed up cargo loading lor the VC10 nose-loading Ireighter

100

101

DEVELOPM

DEVELOPME T AND PRODUCTION

TAD PRODUCTION

The rare, double-decked, clamshell nose-loading freighter seen in model form. This proposal, with its expensive new structure, could have created the world's first real. pure freighter type. It has received little coverage and is virtually unknown.

Vickers fclt they could push the boundaries even further and they did just that with the fourth cargo-option design in the form of the VCIO FA Nose-Loading Freighter, which Vickers (as BAC) presented in ovember 1962 in a brochure of thirty-five pages. The brochure, which was passed to selected airlines, notably those in the USA and Australasia, outlined the allcargo V 10 FA's unique capabilities. Again, the mas ive performance reserves inherent in the basic airframe could be put to good use, as they had been for the hort-Haul VCtO. The F-4 not only featured a unique winging nose, it also contained idea to revolutionize cargo handling. It contained a palletized handling system and freightdocking pier capabilities. The no e loading could ensure a full cargo payload turnaround in IS minutes. The reinforced floor and strengthened nose added weight, but the lack of interior passenger fitting and galleys reduced that weight. The FA could carry a 79,8001b payload at an allup weight of 330,0001b over a range of

3,600 mile from even the most exacting airfield conditions. The underfloor freight holds combined with the palletized freight cabin could offer 7,740 cubic feet of capacity, with 6,767 cubic feet of capacity in the palletized cabin. The maximum freight package length was a world-beating 83ft with a 2in loading excess clearance. The swing nos was d signed to be opened and closed hydraulically via an inboard-mounted jack-arm strut slide. To assist the main jack arm, three smaller \ uller ' helped ease the section back on to its guide and clamp it hut to re-form the fuselage. Lift and lock brackets ensured a perfect fit with twenty circumferential latches in the form of cup and sockets with shear pins offered a very afe fixing join. Even the floor beams had clamp locks around the control runs. The only obvious signs of the conversion were the two faired-in bumps on the starboard side of the fuselage, external to the skin. The lower hinge carried the thrust loads and the upper hinge carried the radially imposed loads.

102

All the main flying and operating controls were transmitted across the join via parallel action tappets; tension regulators ensured that any slackening of runs was prevented. The electrical cabling and radio du ts carried a V8St loop to allow them to swing with the nose. The freight floor had lashing points of two option. The FA could be ordered with a standard-type VCIO floor that used the former eat rails as lashing points, whi h took a 5,0001b load via a 20 sq in grid lock mounting. Alternatively, it could be ordered with a heavy-duty floor that allowed high load den ity weights up to 5,2501b for a single axle with a Sft pitch. Both versions could spread the load carried by using spreaders. The heavy-duty floor could carry up to 2051b per square foot and did so by featuring longitudinal extruded light-alloy floor planks spaced lOin wide. These could carry a to,OOOlb load strain in any direction. There were also wall-mounted lashing points. Four lines of roller tracks were provided down the freight cabin's length. The rear

The proposed underfloor lounge.

of the swing nose formed a crash barrier stressed to 9g. The weight penalty for all this versatility was a very reasonable 1,800Ib. Vickers reckoned that the FA could be loaded normally using existing equipment. However, the company pointed out that the ri e in world freigh t traffic wou Id see the development of high-speed jetty loading direct from the hangar, in the form of Iide-in pier or jetways, rather than loader of the cissors jack type. The VCIO FA's main feature was it ability to carry a large cargo load of long items (up to 3ft) on virtually any route in the world. nlike so many pure freighters, it was not barred from airports such a Mexico City, Bogota or airobi. In the BA VCIO F-4 brochure, produced by BA at Filton in 1962, even Pacific route listings and payload/range sectors were presented - notably across the Pacific to Japan and Australia.

The VCIO F-4 wa a serious proposal for a very serious aircraft. If it had gone ahead it would have c8ptured, if not created, the market that is today's current cargo scene. All-freight versions of widebody airliners span the globe on the massive cargo- and document-delivery and parcel-moving bu ine ses that have evolved. Vickers had an aeroplane ready to meet that market, before it grew into such a massive opportunity. Yet, once again, the company wa thwarted. Thi was underlined in the 1970s, when Flight International was moved to print a spoof business report on the 'what ifs' of BOAC acting out its intentions to buy and run a fleet of VCto freighters and mixed combi airframes.

know about the little-seen V 10 freighter with an uPIJer deck and lamshell nose door. As revealed in the photograph on page 102, this was a VCIO airframe with an elongated and bulbous nose with an elevated cockpit, and straight-through nose-swinging, nose-loading freight system. In fact, it looked Iike a cross between the idea behind the Carvair, and the front of one of the Airbus transporter aircraft of the late 1990s. Highly advanced and very unusual, it remained a secret in-house project at Vickers that never got further than a model being built. Once again, the true potential of the VCIO was lost.

The Secret Freighter Design

Having managed to sell Viscounts worldwide - not least in the USA - and Vanguards to the Canadians, the Vickers sales and marketing team was not slow in

Whilst many are familiar with the existence of these versions of the VC I0, few

703

Other Airlines

DEVELOPM

tapping into its existing customer bas. It would be natural, they reasoned, for them to supply long- and medium-haul jet airliners to those airlines that already used the Vi kers product line. On top of that, the VClO's undoubted runway performance would make it especially attractive to Commonwealth airlines, whether they were
TAD PRODUCTION

and United and Eastern were al 0 approached. Qanta could not be cracked (not with its superbly performing 'hot rod' 707-13 s), but Tran Australia Airlines and the ew Zealand operators were involved in discussions. Existing operator. of the Comet - not a Vickers product, but British at least - were also approached and talks with Aerolinas Argentinas and Misrair went quite a long way. For the outh American, the VCI0 put on a spectacular sales tour, with Vickers (BAC) painting special models for

Mi rair and Varanair in their liveries. Other little-known highlights of the V 10' ales po sibilities include a presentation in June 1961 to Uruguay's PLU A airline and on month later in July to Poland's national carrier LOT. A uper VC10 in the colour of the Greek carrier Olympic was also created. As late as 1966, the V 10 made a sales pitch to the Czecho lovakian airline CSA, and as late as 1971 there was talk of setting up a V 10 licen ed production line (along with the Trident) in hina.

CHAPTER FIVE

Flying the VC 10 - A Pilot's Perspective Transferring to the VC 10 Despite the advanced nature of the VClO's wing performance, and it radical four rear-mounted engin s and massive T ta ii, wh ich had never been seen before, the VClO was amazingly easy to fly. The ease of control, and the huge differences in available power to whi h pilots had to adjust, are best appreciated within the context of the time. At the time of the VClO's entry into airline service, most of

the senior pilots in the airlines, notably in BOAC, were ex-wartime cr w with experience on fighters and heavy bombers - all of which were propeller-powered. Their airline careers had developed through flying the likes of the York, Lancastrian, DC6, DC- 7, Hermes, Argonaut, Stratocru iser and Constellation. Many had graduated to the turbine-prop power of the Britannia 312 and a few had flown the Comet. Incredibly, some, notably at BUA and East African, came to the VClO direct from

In-flight delight - a BOAC Super VC1D in its element.

704

705

D -3 and other mall-prop experience. A few pilots had RAF jet experience but, in the main, the transfers to the V 10 were senior aptains who had had command of propeller aircraft. Obviously, as time went on, new entrants and command conversion candidates came to the V 10 with other jet experience. However, in BOAC at least, there was little crossover between the 707 and V 10 crews and two definite camps emerged. It was said that the better student went to

FLYI G THE VCIO - A PlOT'S PERSPECTIVE

the V to, but the 707 crews contended that they were given the more demanding machine hecause they were more a~ Ie. u h folklore cannot be judged o many years later. It is nota~ Ie though that many of the Concorde crews were treamed off from the VC to crew camp at BOAC. Maybe their experience with the VC 1 's power and approach characteristics rendered them better able to convert to oncorde's delta-wing technique. However, many 707 pilot also made a great success of transferring to Concorde. The vast differences in handling jet thru t as opposed to prop power were held up for scrutiny. Pilots were used to flying nose-down approaches. They were used to non-swept wings with plenty of buffet warning at high attitude angles; they were used to the lift effects of prop wash over the wing and flaps and they were used to slowing down in heavy turbulence. The techniques of take-off were also different. lost of these pilot were used to a long run down the runway followed by a graceful, if not downright dignified rotation, and a leisurely climb out at a hallow angle of ten degrees or less. Few of them had encountered a slat-equipped wing, let alone jet power. Even the Comet pilots had learned to rotate gently and climb carefully, not lea t hecause of the Comet' own need for a very careful rotation angle. Indeed, there had been a series of incidents involving the Comet, including one that occurred at Rome, and one in India during a Canadian Pacifi Airlines delivery flight. imilarly, none of these pilots had had to handle an aircraft with a very long forward fuselage with the nose wheel set well back behind them, let alone deal with stick pushers and a nose-up approach attitude. There was much that was new. It is therefore a fine testament to the test pilots and training captains that so few incidents occurred in the training and commercial service of the VCIO.

Features of the YClO The VC 10 off; ed nearly 50 ton of thru t, the capability to climb at up to 20 degree of angle and, of course, superb wing aerofoil performance. On the approach it needed to be monitored and guided, sink rat bing of particular importance with the rear biased wing and c.g combined with the long spool-up time of the jet engines as opposed to the prop power with

which the pilot were familiar. (Although the Conway engine spooled up more quickly than ome - in around 6 seconds upon' lam' demand.) The flight deck was huge, the bigge t ever seen on a jet airliner and big enough to rival that of the tratocruiser. On entering the flight deck, the new pilot wa met with a wide, airy room that was so well designed that entry and egress to the pilot' seats was made around the outside of the seats via gangway. Between the seats, they found a wide centre console or pedestal with engine and flight controls to the fore, and with autopilot and supplementary equipment to the aft. Of note was the good visibility to the front and sides through deep windows - so different from the flight deck of the 707, in which the pilots' outer shoulder would be butted up against the fuselage and reinforcing post with the flat window pane close to their face. Looking forward, the VC I0 offered a depth of field far better than that of the 707 and the DC-. uch visibility was a definite aid to safety, not just a gimmick. There was even room to store maps, en route information notes and a mall meal tray on the window ledge beyond the black coaming on the main instrument binnacle where it swept down at each side. In front of the pilots were the standard flight instrument, flight sy tem, flaps, slats, and dials indicating engine rpm. The centre console contained the levers actuating trim, flap, slat, spoilers, and so on, and, behind them, the communications block. The TPI (tailplane incidence) setting knob was also a highlight and, once set, was not to be changed other than setting the required 6-degree noseup setting for landing (Standard) and 4-degree nose-up ( uper) when landing with the TPI trim lodged in the cruise position. This was not easy because it reduced the amount of elevator authority for flaring, at the same time as creating a nose-down pitch. Of note is the fact that the VC I0 introduced a de ign of flap, slat and spoiler levers that were all similar in design, and had a et 'feel' to them that imitated their settings. In this way, it wa easier for the crew to assimilate what ettings and effect had been enacted. These lever were all beautifully ma hined and, in comparison to the hand brake-style levers of other designs, quite delicate in design. The stall system and its airflow-sampling vaneensor system instruments were ::Ilso easily

106

FLYING TH

to hand. The duplication of the four main throttle ontrol at the side-facing engineer' station was highly unusual in a jet airliner more often seen on a Constellation, on which the engineer was the busiest man on the flight deck. These throttle, and his fuel, hydraulic and electrics panel, allowed him to fine-tune the VCto to a good degree. The engine vibration meters were also prominent and allowed the engineer to assess each engine's condition individually. They were scaled with a 3.0 to 5.0 mean band of delineati n. In the cruise, a good VCIO Conway engine would run at around 2.2 units or divisions; others ran at 3. to 4.0. Above that figure, engine problems could be expected, with a vibration alarm coming above 5.5 units. Higher readings at take-off thrust were expected and allowed. Because all engines differed, each flight had a vibration log and it was as well to check it before departure to see what each of the four Conway had been feeling like on its last outing. There were a number of early shutdown incidents due to this anomaly in readings. In the end, engineers were told to concentrate not so much on the vibration, but on the difference in the parameters of each engine's reading. This was a more accurate assessment of what each individual Conway felt Iike. The author recalls seeing a Standard VCto (G-AR VE) suffer high vibration readings (4.5+) in number 2 engine en route to Kana and Lagos at 35,000ft over the Sahara desert; the order to shut that engine down was one of the rare Conway shutdowns in service. Indeed, the RAF decided in the late 1990s to remove the expensive-to-maintain vibration metering on their VCIOs and to monitor vibration in a different way. Given that it was the parameters of vibration that mattered, not just one reading, the RAF monitored the engine temperatures for signs of mechanical problems. The instruments were cut to the minimum for the age, and the roof-mounted console wa also cut down in size in the interest of better ergonomic and monitoring. The electro-mechanically powered flying control unit indicator - known within Vickers as the 'baby aeroplane' gave good quick visual reference to the state of the system. Oppo ite the engineer, there was a navigator's eat with a work table and extra seats for the junior pilot and supplementary crew.

Start-Up and Take-Off Engine start-up required ground power, as most civil VCIO did without an auxiliary power unit (B A and EAA had on-board air start-up, but not an APU), and the start-up procedure was the flight and ground engineers' remit. With clearance to taxi, the VC 10 pilot eased the throttle up a touch after releasing the brake and the aircraft then glided forward. With the flight deck hanging over ten feet forward of the nose gear, and with the main gear rear-biased, VC 10 pilots had to be taught to be brave and 'go in deep' when taxiing (and even more so with the longer-bodied Super VClO). This meant they had to learn to taxi the nose of the aircraft out over the grass at the edge of the taxiway when turning. Only by doing this could the pilot avoid dragging the main gear on to the grass the corner would be cut if he failed to move the aircraft far enough forward. At first, this took ome getting used to. Despite this slight complication, the V 10 could be completely turned around within a 15 ft wide runway or taxi apron. Take-off was an impressive moment. Lined up at runway's end, the handling pilot would set the rated power for the circumstance and relea e the brakes. With an audible but muted sound inside the cabin, and a roar outside, the VCto would get off the line very quickly. As soon as it was fully spooled up and running, the thrust of the Con ways would give a definite shove. Given that the VCto offered over 20 per cent more thrust than a rival 707 or 0 -8, the uninitiated were often surprised. With a hort take-off run and rotation at between 130 knot and 145 knot for the tandard model, depending on the weights and condition , the VCto was quick off the markon average, tOO knots would come up in less than 25 seconds. The uper model rotated at around the 150/160 knot mark for a fullweight, long-range take-off. The V 10 required about 2,OOOft Ie runway than a 707 to reach the 35ft screen height measure, and it could then carryon with full-length sector rather than having to stop ami refuel. With the classic VCIO crew call-out 'Full power on all four' - 82,0001b of thrust with the 0,42s - the machine would then climb out at around 170 knots. The flaps would be staged up and in as the speed rose to 185 knot, and the need for lat reduced. After the air raft was cleaned up, it could be accelerated on to its cI imb speed of 290

VCIO - A PILOTS PERSPECTIVE

knots until the assigned flight level was reached, and a mach speed cruise number would be dialled in a the air peed reached around 500 knots at the top of the climb. During thi stag a percentage rating of engine rpm was used, varying from 75 to 92 per cent, which equate to around 55-75 per cent of true engine power. Climb rates of 4000ft/min were ea i1y achievable even at this reduced setting. Later on in service life, a complex, power percentage-setting graph was developed in order to conserve fuel and engine life better. In training, fullpower, steep-angle climb were made; 707 crews were often along for the ride, and got the shock of their life! To see a VC I0 rotate and storm upwards in a l5-20-degree climb and blast into the skies was an experience few newcomers could forget. From the flight deck, even seasoned aptains were often astonished. Another man to be impressed was Innes Ireland, the famous racing driver of the VCIO's era, who related his feelings at being on a VCIO flight deck. A man well used to speed and power, Innes wa returning home from the outh African Formula One Grand Prix and the BOAC VCto crew invited him to the flight deck for the take-off from both Johannesburg and alisbury. 'The thing went up like a bloody rocket, nose nearly vertical old boy,' he recalled. 'I'd been on Comets and 707s but I'll never forget that V 10 ride. ever seen anything like it.' He added that he was sure that the aptain was not howing off just because a famous racing driver was on board (although that surely would have been good enough reason!). Another difference between the VClO and the prop liners was the pilot's technique for moving the control column known in the old-fa hioned sense as 'stick force', in reference to the control stick. As opposed to the gentle and slow palming back of the sti k required to coax a prop liner into the air, the VClO needed a good firm positive pull back to initiate rotation to the correct angle. Once mastered, a VCIO could be made literally to 'leap' off the ground. Otherwise, the stick forces required were fairly light and normal for a large aircraft.

The Cruise, Descent and Landing In the crui e, the V 10 had excellent lateral stability and only the spectre of

107

Dutch Roll, 0 common to swept-wing aircraft, prevented total relaxation on the part of the pilot. Dutch Roll wa the V lO's only real vice. With a T tail and rear-bia ed de ign layout, with a rearbiased entre of pressure and a rear-biased movement of polar inertia, the VCto was m re u ceptible to Dutch RoH than the 707 or 0 -8. In the cruise, imply switching off the yaw dampers could soon see a rising-amplitude Dutch Roll take effect. It had to be caught quickly. In extreme ituations, selecting 'speed brakes out' would set up symmetric loss-oflift patterns over the wings and tune the roll out. At approach speeds, lateral and longitudinal stability was excellent. The aircraft could be taken up to 42,000ft but a more normal cruise level range was between 33,000 and 39,000ft. For reasons of fuel economy, VCIO crews often tried to grab the higher levels. They were also able to cruise higher than the long-bodied 707 model and thus avoid turbulence better. ome writers felt that the VC 10 wa unique in being able to crui e at flight level 40 and above. However, while the like of Pan Am's 707s lumbered across the Pacific being buffeted by so-called 'washboard' corrugations of clear air turbulence at 33,OOOft, the Qanta crew on the same route could take their 707-13 shortbodied hot rods up to 41,000ft and find smooth air. The same was true over other oceans. They were the VCIO's only rivals at these flight levels until Concorde and the short-bodied, long-range and higherflying 747 SP arrived, over a decade later. At the stall, the VC to off red buffet warning and some degree of classic nosedown pit h. However, given the inherent Jekyll and Hyde nature of the deep-stall phenomenon, it was obviously best left afe in the hands of the stick haker and stick pusher. The deep stall presented dangers, and pilots received trict guidance on recognizing the onset of a stall envelope. They were taught how to fly up to it and to watch out for un uspected pitch change that could lead to trouble. The aircraft remained stable and at the tall etting when 'clean' configured, but had t b watched when at high weight and on large flap settings. The BOAC model VClOs did not have the revised wingtips of the later models, and were more u ceptible to a wing drop at the stall. The revised wingtip allowed more confident handling in such circumstance,

FLYING THE velo - A PILOTS PERSPECTIVE

ensuring that the tip remained 'flying' for longer. Any a ymmetric effect produced by an engine failure was minimized by the central grouping of the engine at the rear, and leg forces were minimal when holding the aircraft in engine-out flight. Goarounds from clo e to the runway were ea ily performed even at high weight and the difference in performance terms between the VCIO and the 707 was significant - the 707 presented its pilot with some hard work in such situations. Yaw dampers, coupled spoilers and augmented aileron control all gave the VCtO expertly managed handling. The so-called Dutch Roll, in which double axis forces twist the aircraft through two parameters at once -longitudinally and laterally - and cause a weave and twist action, was tuned out by auto damping, but could be dealt with manually. It could be caught with deftly applied opposite aileron at the right moment of upswing, or with lift dumpers, but use of the rudder wa not allowed. The flaps included a device that stopped them in the tracks if they became asymmetric, and tailplane incidence setting could be tailored to the operating needs of each flight. The later uper VC I featured a fin fuel tank and this could l e tuned by a good flight engineer to crossfeed to other tanks and set up an ideal cruise/e.g. attitude. Most importantly, that fin fuel tank had to be empty for landing - any remaining fuel could over-stress the fin-support structure. If the fuel had not been used, it had to be dumped from the tail-cone drain or transferred to the wings. Landing with the fin tank full could only be countenanced in the event of a lifeand-death emergency of an overweight landing caused by engine failure or fire. The VC lOde cended in normal service at about 300 knots and could get from 40,00 ft to sea level in 20 minutes. Obviously, it could get down mu h more quickly than that in an emergency. Extending the speed brakes (spoilers) increased the rate of de cent to 5,0 ft per minute, accompanied by the rumble of broken airflow over the wing. The aircraft could be held in the approach stack at over 200 knots and was kept clean - in other words, slat- and flaples - for such manoeuvring. A more fuel-costly method was to select take-off flap/slat and circle at 160 knors minimum. Final approach saw the VC 10's forte; with the flaps and slats set, all the handling

pilot had to do wa get the aircraft in the groove of a 3-degree descent angle, with the nose held at around 6 degrees up, and the power set and very closely monitored. With the sink rate accurately et (500 feet per minute), the gear down and the final flap setting achieved, the VCl would simply fly itself down the glideslope and wame on to the runway with a final flare of revs and back sti k. It was simple and the training Captains drummed it into their trainees. The afety benefits soon became obvious and the 3-degree approach profile is now recognized as an ideal aid to swept-wing aircraft safety in the let-down phase. The greatest part of the show was the low approach speed - I 15 knots was rare, but sometimes achieved. More normally, the VCIO scythed in at around the 125/135 knots threshold speed - thi was really something to behold for crews used to a 707 screaming in at 20 knots more, and even the old prop captains were reluctant to accept the I 20-knot scenario. Trim change on de cent were minimal. With all this handling stability on offer, bad weather or engine-out approache could be conducted in a safe, relaxed manner. The flare and placing of the aircraft upon the runway ould, with practice, be expertly tailored. A typical scenario might involve landing at London Heathrow into a moderate cros wind on an autumn day. The VClO would approach at 130 knots (often enough to cover any slight crosswind component), and be feathered back to 300ft per minute at 120 knots as the threshold slipped by and the ground effect of the main wing billowed up. 'Thrust reverse' would be called, and the blue and gold-liveried VC I0 would howl down the runway in a cacophony of noise, emotion and style as the reversers roared, the spoiler' fl ipped up and the passenger were pitched forward hy the brakes and reverse thrust. Another flight would be over and the VCIO's sealed-in air of its last port of call in Africa or Asia would be released, and the atmosphere of home would enter the cabin. Although the thrust rever ers were not as effective a those mounted on wing pylon-engined types, the very low approach speed and Dunlop Maxaret antiskid brakes more than compensated for any slight deficiency on the landing run. Lateral stability was ex ellent, even in a crosswind of up to 25 knots, although the big tail fin could catch gusts in landing

108

PILOTS PERSPECTIVE

configuration. The 707 avoided this, but the 707 was at ri k of scraping one of its low-slung pylon-mounted engines in uch condition where a wing had to be kept low into wind. The DC- ,with its greater dihedral, was Ie s sensitive to pod scrapes, although not immune. The VC10's clean wing did not risk such ground contact and the aircraft preferred to be kept crabbed with its nose into wind, wings level, and then have the drift 'kicked' off as the nose came around at touchdown. It wa , however, most important for the pilot to twist the control column and keep the upwind wing held down to avoid any skipping or skidding as the crosswind battered the aircraft around the axis of the closely spaced main gear. This very narrow undercarriage was the VCI O's only slight handicap - dictated by having to have the wheels swing into the fuselage and not the wing. Pilots were therefore taught to watch very carefully for any wing lift in even the lightest crosswind and to hold that wing down, all the way down the runway. Although care was needed, the narrow track gear never cau ed a serious incident. At full flap etting, care also had to be taken not to gra:e them in any crosswind slide that would lower a wing. Eleven degrees of bank were available before the flaps would graze the tarmae. Bounced landings on the V to required a special technique. It was not possible simply to put the aircraft down again. Loss of airspeed would mean loss of elevator authority and, with a declining airspeed at touchdown, the elevator would rapidly become useless and the bounce would ontinue. Contrary to human nature, the power had to be re-applied ju t as the aircraft touched down in order to effect a power-controlled second touchdown. Bounces of 25 to 50ft would need decisive command action to stop a disaster happening.

established, even with the temperature rising and the power falling off, meant that, at this crucial moment of flight, even a damaged engine was left to give it last. Thus e tabl ished in a safe cI imb, the rule wa then to attend to the engine. Obviously, if there was a big fire, fuel would have to be cut off as oon as possible, but even then the flying manual informed the pilot that, 'It is not desirable to rush into the engine shut-down drill even though a fire warning may have been given. The appropriate drill should normally be commenced above 400ft when the aircraft is climbing away safely.' However, with a double-engine failure at such a rucial moment, it was imperative to clean up the airframe and achieve enough rate of climb to meet obstacleclearance parameters. At first, the idea was to retract the gear and flaps very quickly, but this action, although it greatly cleaned up the airframe in drag terms, left the V 10 exposed to the threat of a tall. Thi was possible because it would lose its highlift devices - the slats and flap - just when it needed them most. BOAC introduced a

clever cheme that was incorporated into the pilot's operations flying manual as the afest option. Thi was to bring the gear up and rai e the flaps, but to leave the slats out, extended for all they were worth, thu protecting the wing from 10 of lift and stopping it entering the pre-stall buffet and then the stall arena. This practice required some very careful handling from the copilot, who had to split the two levers, slide the slat lever to it rearmost position and make sure he pu hed the flaps lever forward, having removed the two levers' baulk pin, all the while ensuring that he got it right and that the slat lever remained protected. It was not an easy task, but it was a crucial one, so it had to be practised until it was second nature. The aircraft had to be accelerated to V2 plus 20 knots before flaps fully up followed by a further acceleration to a safe V2 plus 45 knots handling peed where altitude climb could be sacrificed for peed if necessary (l50ft given up created a 10 knots speed increase). Careful handling \Va needed at this tage, and a stall warning as the flaps came in could be expected, but it

Engine Failures In-service learning oon showed that the VCI could climb away quite easily if it suffered a single-engine failure at V I or beyond. However, even on a VC I0, the pectre of a double-engine failure at such a moment was something that would cause a certain frisson of concern on the flight deck. It happened in BOAC service. Good training, and the rule that nothing was shut down below 400ft with climh heing

The classic tail. Super

velO G-ASGB at Johannesburg; the

Speedbird shines.

709

was believed that enough leeway existed in the stall margins to allow the pilot to get it right. At V2 plu 45 knot the slat could b retracted, provided the speed could be kept up. However, given the fa t that the all-up weights were likely to be high, the be t bet was to leav the slats locked out and land immediately - even overweight, if necessary. Part of getting it right meant leaving the gear down if the double-engine failure took place before the gear had been selected up. This was because selecting the gear up would open the gear doors and massively increase the drag. In all these remedies, good training would help the pilot to achieve accurate flying in ritical situations. ingle-engined flight was covered in the training programme and the V to was flown on many occasions on one engine. With plenty of trim and an eye on the temperature, this aircraft could be succes fully coaxed along, unlike many others. Three-engined, non-revenue ferry fl ights lack to the home engineering ba e were easy for the VC10 and po ed few problems.

FLYING THE VCID - A PILOTS PERSPECTIVE

FLYING THE VCID - A PILOTS PERSPECTIVE

The crowds gather to see Africa's most elegant aeroplane at Johannesburg. Note the short-lived 'stepped' cheatline livery,

The Pilots' View The sensation something that Bristow wrote International on

of flying the VCIO was few pilots forgot. Norman the following in Flight 7 May 1967:

Our reactions ro the aircraft were swift and most enthusiastic. We found it delightful in every way. We eulogized its virtues. We spread the gospel. But our audiences, the future crews of the VClO, naturally reserved judgement. Now, some months later, our own delight with the aircraft can be shown to have been wellfounded, for at the time of writing over 100 pilots have completed their own conversion courses on to the VC I

a and

share our admi-

ration. As a very senior pilot remarked to me after only his fourth landing under training, 'I took it all with a pinch of salt when I heard you discussing the aircraft in the hotel, but this really is a wonderfLtl aeroplane.'

Captain Terence Brand, a former RAF pilot and BOAC/BA VClO/747 Captain, also recalls that the VClO was a 'joy to fly' and a 'remarkable aeroplane; pilots loved it'. Others, including RAF VCIO pilots, reckoned that, judged on the parameters of its time, the VCLO handled and flew like a fighter. In training, according to those who were there, the BOAC VCLOs often touched mach .92 (the VNE design limit speed), and pilots would feel the onset of supersonic buffet over the tail. History does not record whether achieving mach .92 was deliberate, or whether, like the infamous VCLO roll during Dutch Roll recovery practice, it just happened' Strapped into the left-hand seat, with that long nose placing him way ahead of the bulk of the aircraft behind him, the feeling for the pilot sitting at the head of this great skylineI' was special indeed.

770

With a muted whine from the engines, and the elegant angle of the flight-deck windows framing the outside world, commanding the VCLO made the pilot the monarch of all he surv yed; it was a grand moment that felt like no other. The author will never forget the moment of watching the sunrise over Africa from the flight deck of a VCLO, nor sitting in the left-hand seat, experiencing the emotions that even the hardest-nosed veteran of the skies must have experienced. They must have felt something like the great ships' commanders of the golden age of Britain's maritime dominance.

VCIO conversion were veterans of the airline with a war-service record, but others, who joined the VCLO fleet later, came straight from their flying training at Hamble or Kidlington. Often in their early twenties, and most definitely not the product of the RAF, they were a new breed and very different from the men who trained them. In view of the superb safety record of the VCIO, the differences between the 'old school' types and the 'new boys' clearly were not insurmountable. A raw recruit fresh from flying light aircraft in training must have been very nervous when he stepped off the flight fron. London at Shannon to be met by one of the 'old guard'. The BOAC training captains were some of the finest pilots in the world. New recruits went to Shannon in pairs and worked together as a paired team for the entire time there. Anything from twenty to forty landings and takeoffs were gone through, with the full remit of engine-failure, crosswind, slat and flap anomalies. Every possible emergency situation was covered after the recruit's basic aircraft-handling ability was approved. There are numerous tales relating to all the BOAC training captains. It is perhaps unfair to mention just one man but the name of Tom Stoney cannot go unmentioned. Stoney was the epitome of all that was best in an airline captain. A wartime RAF pilot and test flyer, with early jet experience from the BOAC Comet I days, he exuded reasoned and reserved, yet certain, command confidence. A man of humour and great kindness, with southern Irish roots, he was held in great affection by many men. He was not an ogre, but an encourager and a helper, yet still a commander with discipline and standards. He was one of the world's leading commercial pilot-training figures at the time, and had an eye for what was later termed as 'crew resource management' -

now the buzz term in 1990s aviation safety. Stoney had a decorated wartime career with RAF Bomber Command (Lancasters) and was part of the early BOAC Comet team. He knew what he was doing and was one of the men who took the VCLO training flights up to Iceland to teach pilots how to land the airliner on an icy runway in a 30-knot crosswind. He added to the moment by making them do it without any instrument landing aids and by requesting ATC to turn off all but the basic runway and approach lighting. Clearly, in such circumstances, failure was not an option, and Stoney helped pilots make success a reality. Stoney would meet young VCLO fleet recruits at Shannon and greet them by their name, adding, 'My name's Stoney. You'll be flying with me.' It was enough said. Through people like Stoney and his much-respected colleagues, including Peter Cane (ex-Imperial Airways), and a bunch of ex-RAF Bomber Command and RAF Coastal Command pilots such as Jack icholl, Robert Knights, Norman Todd, Norman Bristow, W. Wallace, D. Wilkins, A. Robinson and others (including Captains Gray, Walton, Roberston, Rendall and Field), BOAC VCIO crews learned their trade. They learned to be the best and to create aviation history. BOAC never lost a vela and never had a crew place one in danger of being lost. When BOAC had a mechanically induced VCIO incident, the superb training and teamwork of the crews saved the day. The BOAC crews developed a team spirit in training that lasted well into the last days of the British Airways Super VCIO services. Highly professional, they were immensely proud to be VCIO pilots. Myths have developed around the VCLO days. However, the fact is that

velD Training Crew training for BOAC took place at han non and, in later years, at Prestwick. Many of the BOAC pilots undergoing

777

the training flights from Shannon flew below the level of the clifftops, and practised every possible emergency scenario, even at some risk. Research among those who were there reveals that a VCIO was allegedly rolled deliberately by a senior pilot (whose name remains a secret), just as the 707 had been. He had, quite legitimately, been exploring the aircraft's handling at high bank angles, and found that the VC 10 eased itself around its own axis' Sadly, unlike the 707 incident, there was no picture to prove it. The aircraft's T tail was reputedly seen to waggle slightly something that is familiar to the RAF tanker crews. Th is wi II come as no surprise to those who have seen a VC la's T tail twitching and waggling during manoeuvres or turbulence - especially when seen through the fl ight-deck periscope. A young VCLO trainee would pass through Shannon and then spend years toiling away as a Second Officer as part of VCLO crew. It would often be months before they would actually fly an on-line 'live' commercial service and have the chance to land or take off a VCIO. Each pilot was graded using a card system of development rating. Even the veterans who converted to the VC Ia were graded and could only fly the aircraft after various stages of training and supervision. Whatever their rank, they were all monitored through a card system that ensured currency on the type. After a demonstration ride by their allotted training captain, the new pilots would learn their craft until they got it righ t. Consistency was the th ing. If they could demonstrate that, they would eventually find themselves flying the VCLO. Very few failed the VCIO course - the excellence of the aircraft and of the training speak volumes.

I TO SERVICE WITH BOAC

CHAPTER SIX

Into Service with BOAC Changing the World of Travel Today, the entry of another jetliner into passenger service is a routine event in the world of air transport. It is a new shape in the sky, but nothing to change the world and the way people travel.

When the V 10 entered service, this wa not the situation. The launch of this airliner really did change the way people travelled - not just because it was a fine aircraft that brought new standards, but because it took the jet age to routes that had previously been served by prop power. The superb Britannia and the

omet 4 had increased speed and cut journey times, yet they had not cut sector lengths and still carried fewer than 100 pa sengers. The Comet 4 on BOA's routes, notably to the Far East and outh Africa, had represented the dawn of a new era, but it was limited by its payload and range in tropical conditions. The early

G·ARVF being de-iced at a North American airfield.

BOAC's G·ARVF 'Victor Foxtrot' on its first visit to Salisbury. Rhodesia. on 28 January 1963. Note the crowds on the balcony.

772

model 707 improved only marginally upon this limitation. With the advent of the V la, travel changed. Now it was possible, for th first time, to fly some really long sector with a full payload and at even higher peeds. Journey time, cabin comfort, safety and pilot operations were all improved by the V 10 to an unprecedented degree. Although the advertising of the time may eem corny, travel on a VCIO I' ally wa the marvel of the big-jet age, as the copywriter laimed. The fact that the VCIO landed 20 knots more slowly than it rivals, and got off the ground far more quickly, was woven into the copywriting too. apta in Lovelace, Brand and Harkness also appeared in BOAC's advertisement. Although still far more exclusive than

th mass air travel of today, in the 1960s flying was open d up to a greater public than ever before, and the VCI0 played a major part in that development.

The Standard in Service On 29 April 1964, six years after the laying of the V la's paper foundations and the BOAC order, igned between ir Ba il Smallpiec of BOA and ir George Edwards of Vicker, the first tandard model VIlOl Type V 10 entered ervice with the British Overseas Airway orporation. On that day, G-ARVJ left London H athrow for Lagos and Kano. (The first proving flight had taken place just over a month before, on 9 March,

773

with G-ARVF under Captain ane, Stoney and Phillips.) The aircraft was commanded by Captain A.M. Rendall, and carried a enior First Officer, First Officer, Flight Engineer and Navigator. More normally, in sub equent commer ial econd fficer operations, a fledgling could also be found perched in the space of that large flight deck. G-ARVI followed on down the Heathrow-Lago -Kaner Lagos route on 30 April. Within months, all the 'hot and high' airfields for which the aircraft wa designed had been visited by the V 10. A gradual phasing-in programme aw the Britannia and Comet services being replaced by the VCIO. alisbury (then Malawi and Lusaka, both of which replaced the off-limits Rhodesia), Nairobi,

INTO SERVICE WITH BOAC

INTO ERVI E WITH BOAC

Standard VCIO at rest at Lagos.

Lilongwe, Johannesburg, Accra, Tripoli and Bahrain all followed; by 1966, Singapore, Karachi, Calcutta, Delhi and the Orient routes were all VC10 territory. Soon, Hong Kong and Tokyo were served by the V 10, and the early tandard model al 0 found their way to ew York and Toronto, and to some Central American cities. Down the line, with no other operator V las in existence, these aircraft had to be elf-sufficient. Their excellent maintenance record, and caches of spares k pt along the routes, ensured that they kept up a good despatch rate. Along these routes many people came to the airports just to stare in wonder at the beauty and modernity of this giant jet. With its curved, finned tail jutting skywards under blue Afri an and Asian skies, its dark blue paint gleaming and the golden Speedbird

VCIO at Kano during the proving flights - note the early livery.

114

emblem glistening, the VCIO brought a new elegance to the ramps and taxiways of many airports. Like all airliners, the new VC10s had some early problems. Oil-seal failures led to smoke being drawn into the cabin air system, and there were a number of hydraulic failure in the early months. Braking sy tems also needed work, but, in the main, the VC10 and the Conway engines proved very rei iable. By 1969/70, BOAC had used the aircraft to build up it Middle East infratructure to great effect and became the premier European airline serving the region. Flights to B irut, Tel Aviv, Bahrain, Dubai, the UAE, and onwards to Perth and Colombo, all helped make the Middle East a hub for the BOAC Standard mod I V 10 and for BOACcreated passenger traffi and profits.

115

As late as 1973, the Standard V 10 was still opening up Africa. From 5 February 1973, a cheduled BOAC VC10 was inaugurated from Bole Airport, Addi Ababa; the first flight was flown by Captain P. Hoyland from Addis to Cairo, and Captain W. Fletcher from airo to Heathrow, using the redoubtable GAR VI. The runway at Bole was 10 ated at a very hot and very high 7,625ft above sea level, making the airport one of the highe t on the Empire Route network. Previou attempt had been made to take the V 10 to Addi Ababa, but the old runway had not been up to the job - an EAA uper V 10 had unk into the tarmac - and the runway had to be rebuilt. This flight wa part of the VC10 ervice to the eychelles and Mauritius, whi h had been inaugurated by BOAC on 3 July 1971. This trip was flown from London to

I TO SERVICE WITH BOAC

I TO SERVICE WITH BOAC

hours per airframe. Although operating cost were slightly higher than on the 707, the V 10's load factors were consi tently much higher, and they remained so, even after the novelty factor was no longer there. The tandard, like rhe uper, also performed a number of VIP Royal flights and Prime Ministerial flights throughout their career, using a specially fitted VIP cabin-conver ion kit. The VCtO is a favourite with the Royal Family, and several ex-Prime Ministers and Foreign and Defence Ministers.

I \

.

\.

~ ~

/

--

--

~ -

oA

The Super in Service

{

... --

-

~

-.

The entry of the Super VCIO into service was marked by an inaugural London Heathrow-New York JFK flight by GA GD on I April 1965. The BOAC Supers were thoroughly sorted prior to revenu service introduction and encountered few technical problem. BOAC's

onward services to the West Coast and Bermuda and the aribbean were all uper VCIO territory- the airline's opening up of the area went on to 20 July 1971, when GA GB, commanded by aptain J.G. Mort, Captain H.R. icholls and Captain R.B Canever, flew London Barbados-St Lucia-Barbados-London with the first of the weekly service to St Lucia. Even the mighty war-hor e of the North Atlantic skies, the 707-4 6, wa replaced on the London Heathrow to Chicago run as early as February 1966 by the 'swift, silent, serene' (as the advertising had it) Super VCIO. Only on the non-stop longhauls from London to Los Angeles and San Francisco did the 707 retain an advantage. Despite its near-identical dimensions, its Iighter construction and I ss powerful engines meant that it had a pure 6,000-mil range. The heavier, stronger Super VCtO, with an extra 10,0001b of thrust to fuel, simply could not stretch its range that far and had to transit stop for

G-ARVB in the cruise.

icosia by Captain J.L. Halliday, ami by aptain D. Skinner from Mauritius to the Seychelles. The extra stop in airo was related to an earlier technical problem that required a crew change, with duty hours running out on the return. This was not as unusual as it might sound.

The Only Way to Travel uch was the magic of the VCI that, at many of these BOAC outstations, the entire station crew would rum out to welcome or see off 'their' VC 10. uch devotion created an aura of prestige around the airliner and its passengers. oming in on a VCIO gave the traveller a certain cachet. Word soon got out that the VCIO was as good a its advertising and it be ame the only way to travel. Travellers went to the lengths of taking less direct routes, or even waiting, just so that they could travel in the quiet and comfort of the safety-first

VCIO. The load factors on many of BOAC's Empire Routes were often well in excess of 70 per cent on the VCIO routes and it became the tropical traveller's preferred choice - just as the Super VCIO became the Atlantic business trave11et·'s choice when it entered orth Atlantic service. Load factors of 92 per cent and 98 per cent were consistently recorded on some of the African and Indian routes. The route to Johanne burg proved to be a long-term, high-yield pot of gold for BOAC. uch was the uper VCIO's impact in the A that many Americans acrually routed via ew York in order to get on to a VC 10 service to Europe; such actions were previously unheard of. In the first two month of uper V 10 schedules exew York JFK to London Heathrow, over 2, 00 VCtO sear bookings were taken over 100 passengers a day preferring to fly on the Super VCtO and nothing else' The onward sectors to Bermuda or the US West Coast also saw huge bookings. The

776

VCtO's enduring passenger appeal and profi tabil ity were proven by the fact that these figures did not fall off too dramatically after the 'novelty' factor wore off. The VCIO was received with enthusiasm everywhere on its routes. One notable reception took place at Kano in Nigeria. This mud-walled ancient Muslim holy city of the ahara provided a spectaCLdar location for the VCIO; the aircraft approached over the desert and settled on to the runway urrounded by desert sand, crub bushe and huge skies. In the early days, all the arriving VCIO ervices were met by a po se of tribesmen, who rode their cameb up to the runway's edge and offered an official, ceremonial welcome. The desert runway's tarmac was littered with and and stone, which would fly up and batter the fuselage and create a clatter of sound to complement the crescendo of the VC IO's howl ing thrust reverser. By the end of the tandard's first year, the aircraft had flown 12 million miles with a daily utilization rate of just over

The short-lived BOAC/CUNARD titling.

777

refuelling at ew York or Montreal! Toronto. However, with more thrust and better aerodynamic, the uper V I ran it Can ways at lower rpm than the 7 7' earlier units - and thus the VCI had a longer engine life. With its new interior, which seated 16 First Class and 123 Economy lass in a longer body, and it effortle s uprated power, the uper was used as the gold standard for First and Economy las travel between London and the USA, most notably New York. Even after the 747 appeared, the Super VCIO service remained a favourite. The airline also cr ated a round-the-world Super V 10 service by taking its New York-Los Angeles flight onwards across the Pacific to Honolulu, Fiji and Sydney. This was inaugurated on 26 October 1969. Other VCIO services headed to Lima and Caracas in outh America. Super V 10 services to the Gulf added to the airline's r putation in the region. The aircraft also

INTO SERVICE WITH BOAC

I TO SERVICE WITH BOAC

From the Captain's seat - VC1D main controls,

allowed tandard and Super V lO services to be launched form Manche tel' and Prestwick direct to intercontinental destinations. The VCIO played a major part in the expansion and status of these two airports.

The Fleet in Use With the two fleets working well together, BOAC employed over 900 VCIO flying crew members, including cabin crew, to fl y and service the 12 Standard models and uper then in use. With a final total of 12 tandards and 17 upers all a hieving service life by 1970, BOA had made the most of its unwanted child helped by one of the biggest and mo t stylish advertising campaigns ever creat d for an airliner. The copywriter's phrase

Instrument details seen from BOAC Super VC1D flight deck.

'Try a little V lO-derness' was highly apposite. Billboards, newspapers, magazines, posters and cinemas allover the route were blitzed by fetching photography, music and writing. At ]FK, BOAC built its own Super V 10 terminal, at a cost of 7 million pounds. Opened in 1968, it was the first such terminal built in the USA by a foreign airline. For the Super model, BOAC achieved daily utilization rates of ten hours in the first years, and up to twelve hours in subsequent years; high load factors and low maintenance and repair cost meant that, by the early 1970s, the BOAC uper VCI0 fleet was making money. Few airlines could then create and sustain a consistent utilization rate of twelve hours a day and, whatever the foibles of BOA and its conduct over the VCI0, credit was due to the company's management for this success.

118

Several of the BOAC Standard model fleet were leased out by BOAC to other airlines. In the main, these 'borrowed' aircraft operated in normal BOAC colours with a cheatline sticker or temporarily painted logo of the u er airline. The first BOAC Standard, G-AR VA, was initially used on a joint BOAC/Nigeria Airways WT flight igeria service. It wa then old off to Airways and lost in a tragic accident on approach to Lagos in November 1969. Prior to this, igeria Airways had wet-lea ed GARV in full igerian colours for 1966-7. G-ARVI was leased out and then sold to Gulf Air, as were G-ARVC, G-ARVG, GARVK, and G-ARVL. G-ARV] was wetleased to the Ruler of Qatar. Air Ceylon operated G-ARVH on a joint BOA London Heathrow-Colombo service in 1966. Air Mauritius also entered into a short-term V 10 joint service with B A .

The Fleet on the Wane When BOAC became British Airways in the post-1974 merger and absorption of SEA, the days of the VClOs were numbered. BOAC lost a number of its best routes when a Government Committee handed it lucrative licences on West African and Latin American route to aledonian/B A as British aledonian. The new British Airways livery was slowly introduced and a number of the V I fleet flew in a hybrid scheme, with the new name titles, but retaining the elegant blue and gold Speedbird BOAC s heme. By 1978, the whole fl et carried the new red, white and blue colours of BA. As early as 1976, the BA tandard VCIO fle t was on the wane as the big fanengined 747-lO0 and 747-200 and their improved economics took over the routes. That year, Boeing took the Standard

VClOs registered G-ARVB, VE and VH in part exchange for 747s from British Airways (as BOA had just become). Few expected the events that were to follow. Instead of flying these three aeroplanes away to a desert storage ite in Arizona - normal practice in such a situation Boeing decided to chop up the three VClOs at Heathrow in full view- this kept the VCI0 off the commercial market in no uncertain term! Briti h Airways maintenance, engineering and administrative taffhad to sit by and watch their pride and joy be reduced to pieces by a mechanical digger's grab and ma h arm attachment. The Standard model development airframe G-ARVM was kept on in full BA colours as a spare and back-up machine for the Super V 10 fleet until 1979, when it was placed in the RAF Museum at Cosford. G-AR VF had been sold by BA in 1974 to the Gov rnment of the United

119

Arab Emirates and it flew as a VII) aircraft until 1981, when it was donated on permanent loan to a West German mu eum. It still stands there in the superb golden eagle styl ized paint scheme appl ied years before by the BA paint hops. Five other tandards were ~old off to Gulf ir and two others went to the Middle Ea t as VIP/Royal Flight aircraft, with a third leased for the same job. With the exception of two tandard airframes that went to mu eum', th rest of the BOA /BA tandard V llOl VC lO fleet was sold and disposed of. They went mainly to the RAF for conversion or spares via a broker in late 1977, and by 19 2 they emerged as RAF VC I0 K.2/3 airframe. The BOAC Standard fleet had racked up nearly half a million revenue hours in nearly twelve years, and the survivors went on to perform not only on Gulf Air's routes (with higher flight

I TO SERVICE WITH BOAC

The first production Super VC1D, G-ASGA, about to touch down in the early livery.

Khartoum - the VC1D in its intended setting. VC1D flightdeck - note the large windows and spacious design.

720

727

I TO SERVICE WITH BOAC

2. same as above, but with thicker, bolder typeface titles for BOAC I gend to upper fuselage; 3. dark blue fin with large metallic golden p edbird emblem and cheatline trimmed in sparkling gold with stepped broader ection to forward fu elage; Union Flag on lower pan Is; italic BOA logo in gold on hlue cheatline near cockpit lower panels; 4. ultimate peedbird design (1967); similar to above but with revi ed cheatline and colours; BOAC logo 10 s punctuation and becomes bold; tail fin identical, but cheatline now unstrip d and curving down into broad arc through lower fuselage panels to join

on under belly; broad blue stripes to engine pod, broader BOAC title font on engine and on BOA logo behind cockpit on lower panel against rich blue cheatline; uper V lOs had larger BOAC title block on forward fuselage in cheatline; hort-lived BOAC/ CUNARD titling; 1974-76 - interim mixed colours of BOAC/BA fleet; VCIO often seen in basic BOAC ultimate colour scheme but with British Airway title to upper fuselage; some aircraft flew with blu BOAC cheatlines but the red new BA tail-fin livery; gradual paint-shop transition to fleet; 5. British Airways colour scheme of 1976 - white fuselage extends to lower

Wrecked by a hijacker's bomb and subsequent fire, G-ASGO is stripped at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport .

cycles), but also with the RAF. The'e facts underline yet again the integrity of the Weybridge product. The combined fleet of BOAC Standards and Supers flew 560 million miles, notched up 1,207,106 flight hours and carried over 13 million people - without putting a single mark on either passengers or airframes. The BA Super VC10 fleet lasted until 1980 when, with a handful of exceptions that would continue in service for a few more months, the airframes were removed from service. They were stored at Prestwick and Abingdon while they awaited their fate, which was conversion into RAF VClO K-Type aircraft, or the rrovision of spares. These aircraft had made a profit, sometimes even eclip ing the BOAC 707 utilization and hourly flying cost, and never had a single injury. urcly no other civil airliner has achieved thi , especially in the higher-risk arena of hot and high flying. There had been a plan to sell the Supers to a South American broker, possibly for use out of the Dominican Republic, but it was not be. The Super VCIO fleet went

into open storage for what was to be prove to be a long and painful period. The BA uper V lOs enjoyed a swansong, and they were used in diverse roles, including fleet back-up on ome BA European routes. adly, towards th end, they began to look tired and the lack of cabin entertainment detl'a ted from their reputation. The last scheduled BA Super VClO flight took place on 29 March 1981, when G-ASGF headed home from Dar es alaam via Larnaca, and ettled upon I eathrow' tarmac for the la t time in commercial scheduled service. It was the end of an era, the end of a great period of British engineering, and, in ome ways, the true end of the Empire. The last of the old school had gone, Following this last ervice, BA operated three commercial charter for enthusiasts, notably on 29 March 1982, using G-A GL. The last such flight wa from Heathrow on the following day (30 March) and many a tear was shed by hardened veterans and young fans alike. A final signing-off ceremony included a brass band, and, in true British tradition, th sky opened up with its

122

own watery tribute. For national carrier BA/BOAC, it wa the end of the story of VCIO excellence. Fortunately, there were those who wanted to mark the VClO's role in British history and Super VCIO G-ASGC was donated to the Imperial War Museum collection at Duxford.

BOACjBA Type 1101

Standard VC 10 Fleet Details Livery There were five ver ions of the livery, a follows: 1. white-topped fuselage, mid-grey lower panels; dark blue tail fin with two white horizontal stripes, small white peedbird emblem above; Union Flag to top quarter of fin; italic BOAC title block on forward upper fuselage; dark blue cheatline with solid yellow-gold striped edging; blue stripes to engines, gold BOAC titles to pods; sky blue V 10 logo on forward fu elage;

A BOAC Super awaits its next task.

123

panels, no cheatline, dark blue lower pan I ; bright red ectioned tail fin with divided Union flag stripe effects in red and blue to lower fin; all-red upper fin, bullet fairing and tailplane; Briti h Airways titling in blue to upper forward fuselage. peedbird emblem behind cockpit window on upper fu elage.

Standard Fleet Details G-ARVA c/n 04. First flight November 1962. BOAC. Sold as 5 -ABD then destroyed on approach to Lagos, igeria 20 ovember 1969 in igeria irways service. G-ARVB c/n 805. First flight 21 December

INTO SERVICE WITH BOAC

1962. BO /BA. Broken up 1976. G-ARV c/n 06. First flight. 2l February 1963. BOAC/BA. Leased. old to Gulf Air as 4 -VC 1974. Sold 1977. Then converted to K.2 for RAF as ZA 144. G-ARVE c/n 07. First flight 15 April 1963. BOAC/BA. Broken up 1976. G-ARVF c/n 0 . First flight 6 July 1963. BOA /B. old 1974 to Abu Dhabi Royal Flight (UAE). Preserved West Germany (Museum) 19 l. G-ARVG c/n 09. First flight 17 October 1963. B AC/BA. To Gulf Air as A40VG in 1975. Sold 197 . Then con verted to K.2 for RAF as ZA 141. G-ARVH c/n 810. First flight 22 ovember 1963. BOAC/BA. Broken up 1976. G-AR VI c/n 81l. First flight 20 Decemher 1963. To Gulf Air as A40-VI in 1975. Sold 1977. Then converted to K.2 for RA F as ZA 14l. G-ARVJ c/n 12. Fir t flight 25 February 1964. BOAC/BA. To Qatar VIP Flight 1975. old 1982 to RAF for conversion programme spares ship. G-ARVK c/n 13. First flight 2 March 1964. BO C/BA. To Gulf Air a A40VK in 1975. old 1977. Then converted to K.2 for RAF as ZA 143. G-ARVL c/n 14. First flight 2 June 1964. BOAC/BA. To Gulf Air as A40-VL in 1974. Leased to Air Ceylon 197. old 197 . Then converted to K.2 for R F as ZA140.

G-ARVM c/n 15. Fir t flight 9 July 1964. BOAC/BA. 1979 to RAF Cosford Museum.

BOAC Type 1151 Super VC10

Fleet Details G-A GA c/n 5l. First flight 7 May 1964. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 l. tored Abingdon. Then converted to RAF as KA. G-ASGB c/n 852. Fir t flight 30 April 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. tored. Then to R F as KA spares airframe. G-ASGC c/n 853 First flight I January 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 O. To IWM Duxford for static display/preservation. G-ASGD c/n 854. First flight 3 March 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 O. tored. Then to RAF as KA spares airframe. G-A GE c/n 55. Fir t flight 6 March 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 l. tored. Then to RAF as airframe. G-A GF c/n 56. First flight 24 March 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 l. Then to RAF as spares airframe. Flew last BA scheduled fl ight 29 March 19 l. G-ASGG c/n 57. First flight 17 eptember 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 O. tored then to R F as KA.

G-A GH c/n 58. First flight 2 October 1965. BOA /BA. Withdrawn 19 O. tored. Then to RAF as spares airframe. G-A 1 c/n 59. Fir t flight 2 January 1966. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 O. tored. Then to RAF as spares airframe. G-A GJ c/n 60. First flight 22 February 1967. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 O. tored. Then to RAF a spares airframe. G-A GK c/n 6l. First flight 1 eptember 1967. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 O. Stored. Then to RAF as pares airframe. G-A GL c/n 862. First flight 27 December 1967. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. Stored. Then to RA F as KA. Flew last-ever passenger flight - enthusiasts' charter 30 March 1981. G-ASGM c/n 863. First flight 25 February 1968. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 O. Stored. Then to RAF as KA. G-A GN c/n 64. First flight I May 1968. B AC. Destroyed by terrorist action, Daw on Field 13 eptember 197 . G-A GO c/n 65. First flight II eptem bel' 196 . BOAC. Destroyed by terrorist action, chiphol Airport 1 July 1974. mall window panel from fuselage exhibited at etherlands Aviation Museum (Aviodome) chiphol Airport. G-A GP c/n 66. First flight 20 ovember 196 .BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 19 1. tored. Then to RAF aKA. G-A GR c/n 67. Fir t flight 12 February 1969. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. tored. Then to RAF as spares airframe.

CHAPTER EVEN

Airline Service - Other Operators, Africa and Beyond BUA and Caledonian BOA's requirements were the core of the V 10, but it was not solely a BOAC aircraft, and it is true to say that British United Airways, BUA, played a significant role in its life and times. BUA, and its Managing Director Freddie Laker, were

sufficiently closely involved with the aircraft at its production stage to be considered as important VC to contributors. In the early 1960s, hanges were taking place in the airline-licensing world. Freddie Laker saw a chance to break the stranglehold on air transport, which had

British United's first Vel0 lands at Wisley on 31 July 1964.

124

125

previously been controlled by a closeknit group of people. Mavericks were not well respected, and mavericks who flew cargo - as Laker did - were looked down upon even more. Through his tenacity and strength of purpose, Laker, and his supporting team at British United, changed all that. He offered to support

AIRLINE SERVICE - OTHER OPERATORS, AFRICA A D BEYOND

his own country's aviation industry to servic any routes that he might be awarded. BUA was granted extra routes on prestige sectors of the airline world, and this allowed an expansion that led to this small outfit operating four tandard model VCIOs. For BUA, the VCW offered greater airfield performance than the Comet 4 (with which BOAC served its South American routes), and was better tailored to its needs than the 707. Notably, it was faster and more comfortable than the Britannias that were BUA's backbone. The BOAC-specification VCIO wa not able to service the traffic needs that were at the core of BUA's business at the time. However, Laker had an idea to make the VCIO a highly flexible and profitable machine. This led to the creation of the VCIO with a front-section, side cargo door. Thu equipp d - with an interchangeable passenger cabin that could

operate in a variety of configurations, notably with part of the forward cabin screened off to carry freight with the rear cabin taking passengers - the VCIO was much better suited to BUA's mixed-traffic contracts in Africa, and then in South America. A normal configuration for the BUA V 10 would allow for 84 Economy passengers, and a small First Class cabin, both lying behind a freight section carrying five tons of cargo. This change to the VCW allowed Laker's ideas to come to fruition, much as they had with the combined passenger/ cargo- (car-) carrying conversion of the DC-6, which became the Carvair. Taking over BOAC's loss-making South American routes, BUA stemmed the flow and actually created a surplus. BUA had been using its Britannia fleet to service its Ministry of Defence trooping contracts, but, after more VCWs were secured, these were also used to fulfil the contracts. The VCIOs were

AIRLINE SERVICE - OTHER OPER TORS. AFRICA AND BEYOND

equipped with the MoD-standard, rearward-facing passenger seats at spacious pitch. BUA served many West and Central African locations, often through routes personally negotiated by Freddie Laker. At one stage, Freetown, Sierra Leone, was served by a specially labelled BUA VC10, but problems with the runway curtailed this rare arrangement. The success of this variety of services using the VC10 proved beyond all doubt that the combi-type mixed-configuration VCW airframe was a winner. It could carry a full combined load from a difficult, hot and high airfield on to a full-length (4,000-mile) run to Britain. It certainly showed what an opportunity B AC had missed by not optioning its mixed-cargo and all-cargo VCW orders. BUA was also able to offer and operate its VCWs in passenger-only configuration on many occasions.

Framed by a DC-7 and Britannias. BUA's original livery sets the scene.

BUA home base at Gatwick sees G-ATGJ and a fellow company VC10 at rest between uplifts.

126

The BUA machines were labelled Vll03 Type VCIOs and, like the Ghana Airways Type 1102 machines, incorporated changes to the wings over the • original speCification of the BOAC Type 1101 VCIOs. Most obvious was the reprofiling of the wingtips, with a leading-edge droop curve to the tip and a 4 per cent wing-chord extension. BUA's first machine, G-ASIW, first flew on 31 July 1964, entering service two months later. The second, G-ASIX, first flew on 16 October 1964 and was delivered less than two weeks later. The third BUA airframe was actually a machine ordered by Ghana Airways and never taken up; BUA jumped at the chance to secure the order, and purchased what would have been 9G-ABQ and actually became G-ATDJ (which explains the outof-sequence registration following the first two machines).

Most unusually for an aircraft manufacturer breaking new ground, Vickers (BAC) decided that it would sell its Vl100 VCIO prototype - the hardworking G-ART A. After a very heavy re-fit, and updating to VClO Type 1109 specification, Laker secured this aircraft. Intriguingly, the re-fit, or rebuild as it basically was (at BAC expense), did not include the cargo door for which Laker had fought so hard, and which had made the VCI0 viable for BUA in the first place. The aircraft was then leased to Laker Airways. By then, Freddie Laker had left BUA and set up his own airline with two Britannias. He immediately subleased G-ARTA as OD-AFA to Middle East Airlines. The aircraft returned to BUA via various dealings and joined Caledonian/BUA in 1969. The airframe ended its life on the runway at Gatwick in 1972 when, in a bounced landing,

127

flying empty of passengers in atrocious, gusting wind conditions, the aircraft's central keel member and fuselage skin were twisted out of alignment and beyond economic repair. The BUA VC10s performed tasks far beyond the operations of other airlines. One week, a BUA V 10 might be thundering up into African skies in its classic role; the week after, it might be skimming a ross the Andes or letting down into the heat of Rio. A few days later, that same aircraft might b assisting BUA's European holiday routes by taking an extra-large passenger load to the Mediterranean, supplementing the BUA BAC One-Elevens. Laker, ever the showman, made the most of his VC10s in best-of-British style. The first BUA VCW was displayed at the 1964 and 1966 BAC Air Show at Farnborough. On the first outing,

AIRLI E SERVICE - OTHER OPERATORS. AFRICA AND BEYOND

AIRLINE ERVICE - OTHER OPERATORS. AFRICA AND BEYOND

BVA/Caledonian Type 1103 Standard VC10 Livery The different versions were as follows:

1. white-topped fuselage, dark blue cheatline with gold striped trim; red titling, white fin with small Union Jack flag; light grey undersides; Roll-Royce VCI0 legend on engine pods; dark blue rail fairing; 2. latterly, white fuselage top, beige lower panels; bright blue titles, bright blue and beige split cheatline; black titles with BUA logo on tail fin; black radome; 3. British Caledonian livery royal blue fin with gold lion design; white-topped fuselage, broad split cheatline in blue and mustard gold with white trimming sweeping down to nose radome; unpainted engine pods; early titles were Caledonian/BUA then changed to British Caledonian. Small Union Flag to forward fuselage.

British Vnited Airways/ Caledonian Type 1103 Standard VClO Fleet Details

Ness' in 1969. Written off Gatwick on landing 28 January 1972; broken up.

G-ASIW c/n 819. First flight 30 July 1964. BUA then BCAL as 'Loch Lomond'. Then to Air Malawi as 7Q-YKH 1974. Withdrawn from service in 1979, broken up in Malawi 1994/95. G-ASIX c/n 820. First flight 16 October 1964. BUA then BCAl as 'Loch Maree'. Sold to Sultan of Oman as A40-AB in 1974. Withdrawn 1987, donated to Brooklands Museum Trust. Historic return/final flight 6 July 1987. G-ATDJ c/n 825. First flight 18 June 1965. Ex-Ghana order as 9G-ABQ taken on as BUA then BCAL Type 1103 as 'Loch Fyne'. Sold to MoD/RAE as XX914 1973. Broken up 1983. G-ARTA c/n 803. First flight 29 June 1962. Prototype, remanufactured as Type 1109 for Laker Airways 1968. Leased to MEA as OD-AFA in 1968. Then to BCALas 'Loch

Ghana Airways - An African Icon

G-ARTA seen in the revised BUA livery.

G-ASIW carried the latest model of RollsRoyce Silver Cloud in the cargo hold and disgorged it via a Carvair-type scissors jack. Laker repeated the trick during the BUA sales tours in South America (where BUA had no previous presence), and during VIP sales trips to promote the airline in Africa (with Captain P.A. Mackenzie in command). In South America, BUA served Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. These services, combined with the African sectors, allowed BUA to achieve a high daily utilization rate with the VCIOs, slightly bettering the early BOAC Standards' eight hours a day, with a nine-hour-day utlization rate. The first two B A VCIOs flew over 3,000 hours each in their first year on 390 return sectors. The BUA advertising linked the airline's VClO and BAC One-Eleven

aircraft, and stressed the 'jet' aspect of the operation. The early BUA livery, with its plain fin and narrow cheatline, was changed in late 1965 to a broader-brushed blue and beige scheme that many found attractive; it was certainly modern for its time. On board, BUA provided passengers with high-quality amenities and made available some very appealing memorabilia of their VCIO flight. This included a reproduction of a sixteenth-century map labelled with a legend and certificate celebrating the crossing of the Equator on a BUA VCI0 B A created its own niche in air transport and a place in history with its VCI0s. In supporting British industry (through the BAC One-Eleven as well as the VCI0), it proved that doing things differently, although not always the easiest way, could be rewarding.

728

In 1970, BU A was absorbed ina merger with Caledonian, the Gatwick-based airline that had made a success of second-tier operations, and had created its own premier route network to the US West Coast with long-range, fan-engi ned 707-3 20s. The BUA VCI0s briefly flew with combined Caledonian/BUA titling. Although carrying the same registrations, the aircraft were given names and took on the Caledonian house colours. After four years of sterling service, notably to Africa and South America, within an airline that really was a 707 -orientated operation, the ex-BUA machines (by now slightly faded) were sold off. G-ASIW went to Air Malawi, G-ASIX went to the ultan of Oman Royal Flight, and G-ATDJ went to the RAE/MOD experimental unit. GARTA undertook various incarnations and was broken up in 1974.

G-ATDJ re-painted in British Caledonian colours.

729

Independence from British colonial history took place throughout Africa in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and many emerging independent nations re-assessed their domestic and international airline roles. Despite various American, French, and Russian spheres of influence within Africa, several of the newly independent nations turned to Britain, or were subject to British lobbying, to equip their airlines. This perhaps explains how, between 1957 and 1960, the newly created Ghana Airways had operated an Antonov 12, a o -6, an Ilyushin 11-18, and continued to use the former aircraft of West African Airways that had served the Gold Coast (of which Ghana was at the heart).

R IC - OTHER OPERATORS. AFRICA A D BEYOND

the end, it revolved around one aircraft registered 9G-ABO - and touched the lives of many. In 1961, Ghana Airway ordered three T yp 1102 Standard model VC lOs - the first to tandard pec, and the second and third to BUA-type spec, with freight door). With the e, it intended to expand its network to serve everal European cities, and to extend its inter-African network, with connections from Accra to We t, Central and East Africa. The first Ghana tandard, 9G-ABO, incorporated the 4 per cent wing-chord exten ion and was delivered in November 1964, entering

service at ew Year 1965. The second machine brieny entered service in June 1965. The crews were expatriates who then trained Ghanaian pilots on to the type. Ghana Airways' smart office in London' Bond treet acquired a wonderful cutaway VCI0 model of over 6-ft wingspan. It was destined to remain in the window until 1980, when Ghana Airways VCI0 service ended. After the 1961 order, the airline had realized that it was over-equipped and would not be able to utilize three VClOs fully. The country was also going through

British United VC10 in the cruise.

Ghana Airways was born on 4 July 195 , part capitalized by BOAC. At that time, the British airline had started to retire its ageing Srratocruiser neet from the arduous orth Atlantic run and to transfer it to the West African routes. rratocruiser G-A TZ was suitably titled in joint BOAC/Ghana Airways legends and, on 16 July, inaugurated the service on the busy post-colonial bus ride of the

Accra-Landon-Accra route (via Rome, Frankfurt or Barcelona, depending on schedule). The Srratocruiser brought new omfort to the route, but it was still a prop-powered beast. The jet age could not be ignored, even in an area that some might have considered to be a backwater of commercial air transport. After a few brief years, the Stratocruisers were replaced by the superb

130

Britannia operations. However, it soon became clear that the region's traffic potential, and consistently high load factors, could support a large jet operation of po sibilities greater than those provided by the Comet 4. By 1961, under a strong President and with a stable ociety an I healthy economy, Ghana felt able to order the VC 10. The tory of the Ghanaian VC I0 began; in

With a Rolls-Royce in the cargo cabin. and a BAC One-Eleven overflying, this was a BUA publicity moment at Farnborough.

131

political changes at this time, and the planned expansion into Europ and on to ew York did not happen. Thus it was that 9G-ABO was retained as the sale Ghana VC 10, leading a full life shuttling between Accra and London (sometime via Rome) from 1965 to 19 O. It was a period of safety and reliability, interrupted only by routine repairs and maintenance. Indeed, the aircraft was often seen in commercial ervice sporting partly revised liverie that were completed as and when time and servicing permitted - he tween paint applications. Notably, Ghana Airway' final livery

9G-ABO

*

With plenty of uptrim, Ghana Airways 9G-ABO rotates.

scheme, introduced in 1976, was one of the earliest uses of an all-white fuselage with no cheatlines. The econd airframe, 9G-A BP, was under-used and, therefore, put Lip for sale. Surprisingly, BUA did not take it and the aircraft wa leased out to Middle East airlines in mid-1967. Ju t over a year later, it wa destroyed by Israeli military action at Beirut Airport. Ghana Airway' third machine, intended to be 9G-ABQ, wa bought by B A, direct from the production line, and became the Type It03 G-ATDJ. In Dec mber 1980, 9G-AB was put out to grass, or, more accurately, tarmac at Prestwick Airport in Scotland. She was not wanted as part of the RAF conversion programme and was crapped in 19 4.

Many expatriates and Ghanaians shed tears when the VC I0 service ended; somehow, the replacement DC-I was just not the same a Ghana's first jet. The Ghana Airways VCIO was an airliner that affected a society in a way that perhaps has never been seen before or ince. Even deep in Ghana' hinterland, in the land of bushmen and mud hut, the influence of the Ghanaian VCIO was felt; children made models of 9GABO, and taxis, lorrie and buses sported stylized painted renditions of it. Perhap the ultimate V 10 tribute, and the most unusual, was the fact that Ghanaian coffins were fr quently made in the shape of the VClO, sometimes decorated with VC to models, flowers and carvings. At Accra Airport, crowds would regularly

132

form on the roof terrace to watch 9GBO thunder away. Often, there would be a cheer as the aircraft roared down the runway and rotated. The Ghanains certainly took the VClO to their heart.

Livery There were three definitive versions, as follow (as well as interim paint schemes een between revi ions or maintenance): I. white-topped fu elage, mid-blue cheatIine and dove grey underside. ational flag on tail rudder surfaces 2. revised flag treatment to rudder with trim stripe to cheatline; 3. latterly, all-white fuselage, light grey bottom keel section; large flag over

The modified wing shape is clearly seen in this view of Ghana Airways in the groove.

133

AIRLINE SERVICE - OTHER OPERATORS, AFRICA A 0 BEY

0

AIRLINE SERVICE - OTH R OPERATORS, AFRICA AND BEYO '0

Kana and Lagos routes with BOA . The routes' high load factors and increasing demand meant that expan ion could well be afforded. Big business from former colonial overseer Britian al a pu hed hard for a jet link to improve communications with thi rapidly developing nation. igeria Airways operated it first V [0 service via a lease agreement with B AC. sing G-ARVI and the ill-fared GAR VA in basic BOAC blue, but with very smartly tailored, gold-hued igeria Airways' legends on the forward lower cheatl ines, the service began in late 1964, early in the BOAC VClOs' career. By 1966, BOAC VCIO (G-ARV ) had been wet-leased to the airline in full Nigeria Airways livery, and had entered service. In 1969, Nigeria Airways proudly

bought its own V 10 - BOAC's very first production Type 1101 VClO, GAR VA. Registered as 5 -ABO, it was introduced on the London-Kano-LagosLondon route sy tem. aclly, within months, it and its pa enger would be 10 t in the first VCIO accident. (For a full account, see Chapter 9.) igeria Airway continued to have confidence in the route, and the association between the airline and the VC 10 was re-establ ished.

Livery There were two versions, as follows:

1. initially, white-topped fuselage split by thin/thick divided cheatline in bright

9G-ABO poses for the camera.

entire tail fin; multi-coloured titling of hold design; no cheatline; coloured doors.

Fleet Details 9G-ABO 23. First flight 14 ovember 1964. Ghana Airway, Withdrawn 19 O. Broken up at Prestwick 19 4. 9G-ABP / 24. First flight 21 May 1965. Ghana Airways. Leased to lEA 1967. Destroyed in military action on ground Beirut Airport 1968. 9G-ABQ not built. Airframe to BUA order.

Nigeria Airways 1n 1961, Ghana's neighbour Nigeria was also considering its future. Initially, igeria Airways was to have taken two Type 1104 tandard model VC lOs. Financial implication, and the nation's uncertain status at the time, meant that the two orders were cancell d, however. By the time the BOA VC10s entered the bu y West Africa service to Lagos and Accra, igeria Airways realized that it would lose out if it could not match the VCIO. Previously, the airline had operated joint services, notably using a Nigeria Airways-titled tratocruiser. Prior to that, the London-Lagos-Accra route had been served by BOAC Canadair Argonauts

134

(and an as ortment of other BOAC types). The early Stratocruiser operations served both igeria and Ghana under the West African Airways banner. With the formation of Ghana Airways, igeria Airways came into being via the formation of the We t African Airway Corporation (Nigeria) Ltd on 30 eptember 195 , thereafter becoming simply igeria Airway. The airline's flying-elephant logo found a home upon the wings of the tratocruisers that were labelled up in the airline' livery - the first trat to do so was G-ANUC, followed by G-A A, and others. Again, the Britannias came down the route and deposed the Stratocruisers, and igeria continued its joint service of the

-

This time. 9G-ABO is at high bank angle. Note the chamfered wingtips and lower surface vortex fences.

135

green; flying-elephant logo roundel be ide ockpit window; sectioned green flag design over entire tail fin; dove grey underside; black nose; 2. all-white fuselage extended below thin, double-striped cheatline in mid-green; grey lower panels; small green flag and flying-elephant logo on white tail fin.

Fleet Details G-ARVA, G-ARVI. BOA V 10 tandard models leased from BOAC 1964-66 with BOAC crews and livery with gold-coloured Nigeria irways stickers. G- RVC wet-leased to igeria Airways in 1966 in full igeria Airways colours. Returned 1967. 5 -ABO, previously G-ARVA c/n 804.

really did take the passenger to Africa before touchdown. As with Ghana Airways, the flight and cabin crews wer sourced more and more frequently from the indigenou peoples of the land that th aircraft represented, and not recruited from the former colonial power. This airlin r had been stretched from the Standard model, and had, therefore, traded performance for capacity. However, it could still leave airobi's airfield (at 5,327ft above sea level), from a runway with a midday surface t mperature of 30 degree, and take its load non-stop to London without compromising its alternate-destination fuel-range reserve. In oth r word, despit the condition, EAA would have total freedom in load, fuel, freight and destination scheduling, all year round. Not even the brilliant 747 could achieve a full load on a hot and high, blazing airobi day, when it

would have to trade payload for performance. In 1969, EAA had 120 pilots to cover its VCIOs and the other types in its fle t. The Super V 10 crews worked together a team, with great team spirit, just like BOAC's VClO crews (although the EAA crews did not perhap have BOAC-style 'Atlantic Barons' among their number). The name of the EAA VC10 pilots became legendary. They are too numerous to all be mentioned, but among them were Captain Ain worth, Ainscrow, Aitchison, Brewer, Brumby, Cartwright, Drummond, Hartley, Hill, !lIife, Imison, Jackson, Lavers, Leslie, Meadley, Mitchell, Murray, Ratcliffe, Rickettes and Wilson. They, and the uper V 10 they flew, were part of an era that was unique and very special. EAA's hairman hief Fundirika signed the VClO order with BA in a cer-

emony in London in 1965, and in 1966 the first EAA-liv ried uper V 10 arrived. EAA had made very healthy profits in th previous decade and could well afford the lease/purchase payment plan on its BAC uper VC10s. They were delivered in a triple-stri ped Iivery reflecti ng the three countries that were the airl ine's ore partners. On the tail, a divided un shape, with the registered country' flag dominant, topped off the scheme, which some thought was even more elegant than BOAC's ultimate blue and gold affair. With the BA flight-training team on hand, and EAA's Captain Mitchell overseeing the airline' training and type-conversion plan, EAA ntered the rarefied world of the ultimate version of the world's finest airliner. On 30 September 1966, the uper model 5X- VA was handed over at Wi ley in an appropriately grand ceremony. The EAA crews had attended the

......

On finals.

First flight ovember L962. First to BOAC, then leased to igeria Airways. igeria Airway 29 ] une 1966. old to Written off on approach to Lagos 20 November 1969.

East African Airways It i perhaps ironic that the airline that received the ultimate uper V LO was not a frontl ine international carrier of the taw of BOA or Pan Am. In fact, it was East African Airways, whose operations ranged far and wide, and whose crews and staff worked to the highest professional standards. This was an airline whose network and a pirations were well ahead of its time, and more wide-ranging and modern than its location might have uggested. Born from the pioneering work of Wil on Airway in the L930s, the Ea t African Airway group was an amalgam of the aerial services of three nations Kenya, Tanzania (Tanganyika) and

ganda. Ln it early days, the EAA corporation served its domestic, inter-African route needs, yet, through aiming high, it became the premier African-based airline and spanned the globe. New York, Sydney, London, Bombay and Hong Kong were all within its reach. The airline built up a ma ive trade between Africa and the Middle East and India, transporting passengers and freight. Moving on from D.H. Doves and DC-3 Dakota to DC-9s, it also operated omet 4s and made the most of the uper VC10. As a result of its taff, it management, its crews and its leaders, EAA wa no ordinary airline and certainly omething out of th ordinary for an African airline. Having operated the omet, and having been under the aegis of the British colonial sy tem, it was hardly a urprise that EAA was guided to the uper V 10. It could have chosen the 707 or DC-S, and, ind ed, runway-lengthening work had begun at many airports to make these two aircraft u eable in hot and high conditions. However, the fact was that,

136

whatever the pressure applied by London, the Super VClO was exactly the right aeroplane for the airline's conditions. To have chosen the 707 or the DC-S would have been an operational mistake, and EAA knew it. Following an EAA technical committee's recommendation that the airline take th Super V 10, an initial order was placed in March 1965 for three Type LI 54 uper VC lOs. They were to have the added forward freight door and late-model uprated Conway 550s. This was the ultimate uper VC 10 - the combined cargo/passenger fuselage type that BOAC had also initially been keen on, but had abandoned. The EAA machines, unlike all other combi-types, featured a First lass cabin (14 seat) ahead of the freight hold, and the Economy cabin (L1L seats) behind the freight hold. The EAA cabin decor was a rare moment of joy in aircraft de ign, depicting bold African tribal ymbois and wildlife cene in xquisit Iy moulded panelling with oft lighting and warm-coloured seat trims. EAA's cabin

The later, bolder Ghana Airways colour scheme.

137

AIRLI E SERVICE - OTHER OPERATORS. AFRICA AND B YO D

AIRLII E SERVICE - OTII-R 01' RATORS. AFRICA AND BEYOND

engine performance tests, and go-arounds over the African outback. There must have been some awesome ight, which sadly were not recorded on film. On several occasions, Super VC lOs were spotted making last-minute, almo ttouch-and-goes at remote airstrip; then the peace would be shattered by the supersonic crackle of the exhaust from four Conways at max-rated power. The noise must have scattered the elephant in fright! In 1970, EAA started a service to ew York via Zurich, after being denied fifth freedom en route traffic rights via London.

The brand-new 5H-MOG flew an inaugural flight on 10 De ember 1970, under the command of aptain G. Le lie, and a direct premier tandard service between the U A and Africa wa born. De pite some very good financial rerum in 196 , by the 1970 launch of the ew York service, thing for EAA were sadly beginning to change for the worse. Political moves, strong competition from the European airlines, which now serviced airobi, and onward to South Africa, under a new 'open skies' policy, as well as overstaffing, began to take their toll on EAA's previously buoyant finan-

East African's first Super VC1D after arrival at its Nairobi home base.

I3AC VClO school at Weybridge; some of them are pictured on page 139. The delivery flight departed from London on II October 1966. Prior to this, the EAA crews had honed thei I' sk ills under BAC supervision, to the point that the first en' ice could take place on 13 October 1966. The econd E uper arrived less than a month larer in the form of 5H-MMT. The two aircraft were thrown in at the deep end of a campaign to expand EA 's sales revenue that, strangely, made the long-range V I s stop more often than they needed en route between each ultimate destination. This was a standard airline marketing ploy the 'stopover' bonus. While it offered the passenger a free extra destination, it did

nor do much for the fuel figures per flight l Early tight scheduling to serve this campaign left EAA's entry-level VClOs exposed in maintenance terms and, on occasion, the network suffered substantial delays. Quick action and further aircraft re tored the iruation to operationally acceptable levels. In May 1967, EAA took a third uper VCl in the form of 5Y-ADA and at the same time ordered a fourth machine from I3AC (5X-UVJ) and optioned a fifth (5HMOG). In a long and highly distinguished career, the EAA Super VClOs created a niche and their crews became known for their independence and adventuring spirit. EAA took the first Super VC10 into

138

Australia, they flew into Hong Kong, carried Pope Paul VI, Danish Royalty and leading African politicians, and had their own Addis-London Heathrow service. The airline flew a scheduled uper V I service direct from the heart of Africa to Copenhagen Frankfurt, Milan, Rome and Bangkok, and also had a stong Indian network. By this time, the EAA VC IOs were working over nine hour a day and earning their keep. frica's wide-open skie , the In Ea t EAA crews often made the most of the uprated onways and their thrust. Flight te ting and certification check flights could all he carried out over the almost uninhabited bush. EAA uper VC IOs would carry out stall-test descent ,

EAA crews in training at Vickers' VC1D pilots school. Here. Captains H.D. lIIife. T.R. Cartwright. D. lavers and Snr F/Eng B,R.E. Smart are seen at study.

139

cial position. Despite the carriage of freight and fresh produce to major cities, and an increase in touri t safari traffic, the airline began to lose money on a monthly basi, It slil ped behind on its lease payments. It found itself with a diver e fleet - operating DC-3s alongside uper VCl - and those wonderful VClOs were drinking fuel at an average rare of 3 gallons per flight minute. It was a bit like watching money burn for the airline's accountant. High training and maintenance costs with wide needs, and political changes in ganda with the rise of Idi Amin, also played a part in its problems.

AIRLINE SERVICE - OTHER OPERATORS. AFRICA AND BEYOND

As EAA's profit dropped, and the airline's management lost its way, a dark cloud ettled over the airline. The disa ter of its uper VCIO take-off accident on I April 1972 at Addis Abab (see Chapter 9) added to the gloom, and by 1975 the break-up of the tri-partite East African Community agreement between the airline' three member signalled the death knell for EAA. With Uganda and Tan:ania unable or unwilling to contribute their share of the airline's funds, fuel credit suspended and a litany of unpaid airport fees due, the end was in sight, despite the strength of the airline's Kenyan keel. On 28 January 1977, EAA ceased to be and with it went the Super VC IOs of one Africa's boldest commercial ventures. The East African Airways Super VCIO fleet sat at Nairobi Airport for four months after that January day, remaining untouched. While the financial and legal

EAA's Chief Fundirika in the VC1D cabin.

--------

-

With the cargo door open. an EAA Super rests. Note the First Class cabin windows - ahead of the cargo bay, with the main cabin behind.

The Super VC1D with cargo door for East African EAA VC1D 5H-MMT at

mes that had been left in the wake of EAA's collapse was sorted out, the upers simply sat. In the end, they were all reposse sed by their leaseholders BA ,and a team of ex-EAA pilots was recruited to fly each machine home to England. The first of the jets 5H-MMT left its African home on 16 May 1977, flying to the BAC base at Filton and performing without a hitch. The EAA ground engineers watched the aircraft go, emotions running high - this reall y was the end of a dream that had gone beyond the expectations of many. 5Y-ADA followed on 31 May, protesting by throwing a complete hydraulic failure at the crew, and having to land flap- and slat-less at Filton. There, on approach, with the extra speed required for this con-

lHR.

140

figuration dialled into the thrust settings, she landed without incident. 5X-UVJ came home on 26 July with 5H-MOG leaving Africa for the last time in the Kenyan dawn of 3 August. The aircraft were stored in dry-clad hrink-fit wrapping, ubsequently joining the RAFs VCIO tanker-conversion programme, and the tory of this airline ended. Perhaps it was fitting that it wa Africa, the land that gave birth to the need for the VCIO, which provided the final curtain for it winged servant.

Livery There was one version only: white-topped fuselage with white sides to below

141

quadruple-striped cheatline of four colours thickening in width toward rear; black, red, yellow and green stripes; all-white tail fin with yellow ring of un design enclosing the three flags of the EAA partner nations, the registered nation of each aircraft being dominant; grey tailplane and lower fuselage panel and engine pods; pale blue East African italic titling at mid-fuselage upper panels; blue winged-lyon logo behind cockpit.

Fleet Details 5X- VA c/n I. First flight 3 eptember 1966. To EAA. Destroyed on take-off, Addis Ababa 18 April 1972. 5H-MMT c/n 882. First flight 12 October

AIRLINE ERVICE - OTHER OPERATORS. AFRICA AND BEYO D

Africa's finest airliner in her element.

1966. To EAA. Returned to BAE May 1977. Then to RAF as VCtO K.3. 5Y-ADA c/n 883. First flight 21 March 1967. To EAA. Returned to BA E May 1977. Then to RAF as VCIO KJ. 5X-UVJ c/n 884. First flight 19 April 1969. To EAA. Returned to BAE 26 July 1977. Then to RAF as VCIO K.3. 5H-MOG c/n 85. First flight 16 February 1970. To EAA. Returned to BAE 3 August 1977. Then to RAF as VCIO K.3.

Air Malawi everal airline were born from the ashes of Central African Airways, notably the national flag carrier of Malawi and of its dominant leader, Hastings Banda. Malawi, a small land-locked African nation with a hug inland lake and a large expatriate community, was already part of th V 10 story. De pite its small size, lalawi was

visited by many major airlines and boasted a large airport at Blantrye that saw many EAA and BUA VC [0 visits. It was also the place where a VC to met its end, not in an accident, but through scrapping after standing for years in the African sun as some kind of last great monument to lost times and past power. Air Malawi negotiated the purchase of it own VCl after a period during which it had shared with the British Caledonian VCto service to Malawi - an early example of code sharing. The e flight, exLGW (London Gatwick), used a British Caledonian-liveried machine from 1974 onwards. ubsequently, the Malawi Government, through Air Malawi, bought G-A IW (BUA's first V to) from British Caledonian, which had inherited it when absorbing BUA. With a training and spares package as part of the deal, this small African nation rea ted its own VCIO service, much to the surprise of

742

many. The ex-BUA, cargo door-equipped Type 1103 VC10, now registered 7QYKH, heg:m a regular service betwen Malawi and London Gatwick from early 1975. The aircraft's bright red colour schem and jaunty livery design made a fresh change from the more formal atmosphere of its previou incarnation. 7Q- YKH went on to become a firm and faithful fri nd to many Malawians - both indigenous and expatriate. Flight to the Indian Ocean i lands, outh Africa and Holland followed. However, by late 197 ,the writing was on the wall for Air Malawi's sole Strong ompetition and rising fuel price ended 7Q- YKH' economic life and, with no buyer forthcoming, the aircraft was stored for a long period at Bournemouth International Airport (better known as Hurn), from where Vickers had sourced part of the VCto during construction for BUA.

via.

EAA days - silhouettes and shadows at Nairobi.

743

AIRLINE SERVICE - OTHER

nder the threat of ever-ri ing storage charges, a bedraggled and down-at-heel 7Q- YKH left Hurn after several year' storage and headed home to Malawi, where he rested for nearly a decade, decaying in the saddest of manners. In the end, she tipped over backwards due to weight imbalance and at the tim of the author's visit remained with her nose pointed skywards, until he wa cut up for scrap in 1994.

Livery There wa on version only: white-topped fuselage to below window belt line; black, red and green colour Ra h band running front to rear, and widening; bold red italic titles to forward fuselage; red tail fin with white and black Air Malawi circular winged emblem; light grey undersides; national Rag be ide cockpit window.

or

AIRLINE SERVICE - OTIIER OPERATORS. AFRICA AND BEYOND

RATORS. AFRICA A DB YO D

Fleet Details 7Q-YKH, previously G-A IW cln 19. First Right 30 July 1964. To B A then BCAL. old to Air Malawi then scrapped 1994.

Gulf Air Today, Gulf Air i a leading international airline of the modern world, which Rie the globe with sam of the best equipment. Its roots lie in the colonially sponsored days following the econd World War, and in the formation of Gulf Aviation, from various local, Gulf-region air services. Gulf Aviation entered the big league for proper with 0 -3s. The VClO helped Gulf Air to its position as a premier-rated airline; certainly, without this aircraft, Gulf Air's network would not have expanded as rapidly as it did. Fortunately, the ex-BOAC tandard

model V las were available off-the-shelf from B A IBA. Gulf Air bought five of the e machines, having initially lea ed them one by one from BOA IBA. With ri ing profit and a ready ource of trained aircrew, the airline launched a major expansion to Europe and, latterly, to India and the Far East. One of the aircraft was on regular lease to Air Ceylon, as it had been from BOAC in it earlier life, and the airline also used its VCIOs on local, high-cycle commuter operations in the ulf region. After a hectic schedule packed into a three-year operation, the Gulf Air VCIOs were pensioned off to the RAF via a broker for conversion. They were replaced by Tristars. In their time, the Gulf, or 'Golden Falcon' VC10s carried much of th busine s associated with the oil boom and bust, as well as carving a bu ine s niche to and from the region. Above all, Gulf Air provided an after-life for the BOAC tandard VCIOs at a time wh n

their future was uncertain. Along with the profits that these aircraft earned for BOA ,they returned a good percentage of their purchase price through being sold long after they had been paid for. Gulf Air also made economic sen e out of the VCl , which remained popular despite the advent of the wide-bodied jet at that time. Once again, the VCl confounded its critics, erved with di tinction an 1 made money for its operator.

Livery There were two versions: I. all-white fuselage with a broad, triplestriped, green, red and magenta cheatl ine running from the nose along the aircraft and up into the tail fin; broad gold-coloured Gulf Air titles to mid-upper fuselage; Arabic cript title beside this; white tailplane; 2. all-white fuselage with graduatedlength triple stripe of Gulf Air house colour scheme running from nose and cockpit to mid-fuselage, shorter tripes beneath top stripe; tail half-painted in matching stripe de ign with elegant 'Golden Falcon' painting of goldencoloured bird of prey rampant.

Fleet Details A40- VC, previously G-ARV cln 06. First Right 21 February 1963 To BOAC then to Gulf Air October 1975. Th n to RAF as VCIO K.2. A40-VG, previously G-ARVG cln 809. First Right 17 October 1963. To B A then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to I AF as VC10 K.2. A40-VI, previously G-ARVI cln It. First Right 20 Decemb r 1963. To BOA then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF as V 10 K.2. A4 -VK, previously G-ARVK cln 13. First Right 2 March 1964. To BOA , then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF a VCIO K.2. A40-VL, previously G-ARVL cln 14. Fir t Right 2 June 1964. To B C, then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF a VCIO K.2.

-Gulf Air VC1D on lease from BOAC.

144

VIP and Royal Flight VC 1as The Gulf Air VC10 period - from early leases to outright purchase - led to a reac-

tion within the ulf region's VIP and Royal Family entourages. Clearly taken with the line and performance of the VCIO at Gulf Air, three eparate groups decided to lease or buy Standard model VCIO. As early a 1975, British Caledonian was keen to start shifting it small Reet of VCIO. Through various negotiations, Freddie Laker's second BUA VCl , GASIX, found itself on the move to the Royal Flight of the ultan of Oman. Initially seen in a basic BCAL livery, with the lion emblem and titling removed, the aircraft was registered A40-AB before a repaint in an all-white scheme featuring sleek green and red stripes and a stylish shield next to the main entrance door. Owned by the mani Government, the aircraft was kitted out with a full VIP interior, featuring two double bedrooms, a private lounge, and a rear VIP pa senger cabin with a very large galley area. The aircraft wa subject to a number of modern technical updates. ed for the ulran' royal visits and for private use, the aircraft remained with the Right for thirteen years until being superseded by a 747 P. Being fond of the VC 10, the ulran did not want to see it uffer an ignominious end and kindly donated it to a fitting home - the Brooklands Museum at Weybridge. The aircraft landed there on 6 July 1987 after its last Right, to become a tatic exhibit. In the crowd were many luminaries of the VCIO and Vicker, notably Sir George Edwards. This was the Andes incident aircraft (see Chapter 9), and the Right and cabin crews from that Right have had the chance to revisit the aircraft of their survival. There were two other notable VIP uses of the VCIO in the same arena. The former BOAC tandard model VCIO GAR VF wa sold to the Government of the United Arab Emirates, and repainted in a stunning all-white scheme with a large, ornate depiction of a bird of prey on the tail. After even year of VIP service, it was withdrawn from u e and is today, rather trangely, pre erved at an aviation mu eum in Germany. The BOAC tandard model VC I GAR VJ wa placed on a long-term wet lease to the ruler of Qatar from 1975 to 19 1. It provided impressive VIP transport and gave a group of BA crews an interesting posting. The aircraft was returned to BA and sold to the RAF for spares.

145

Middle East Airlines In the mid-l96 s, Middle Ea t au Ii. hased at Beirut Airport, was I king III r • equip its Reet. Having previ u I 1I omet 4s and Viscounts, both to gl fi cal effect, the airline wa well di p 1 toward Britain and the Briti h airltn r that was the VCIO. The airline' traffi as growing and it was looking to erv il customer base needs for tran atlallli travel as well as to continue its local rout . Despite protracted commercial n g tiation and route-licensing consideration, MEA failed to secure its options. t th time - 1966 - the VCIO story was at it height in terms of publi and politi al mess, and MEA had to walk away. Many have suggested that BAC could have sold uper VCIO to MEA, but other factor intervened. A similar situation blighted the VCIO's hope in negotiations with MisrairlEgypt Air. In the end, MEA ordered 707 . However, the airline wa still short of air raft, so it 1: ecame a temporary operator of two mndard model VCl . The third Ghana Airways ma hine - VCIO Type 11 2 regi tered 9G-ABPwas leli\'ered in full Ghana Airways colours in June 1965. It had rved the Ghana irways route for twO year but was under-utili:ed. As part of political and economic changes within hana, the national carrier was reorganized, and attempts were made to sell off 9G-ABP. Perhap rather surprisingly, no buyers came forward, hut, tipped off to ME's Reet shortfall, Ghana Airways managed to lease it out to Middle East irlines from April 1967. It kept its Ghanaian registration but wore a full MEA livery. On the right-side outer-engine pod it carried the titles of Middle East Airlines and Air Li han in Engl ish character. On the leftside engine pod, these titles were repeated in the relevant national cript. The famous MEA cedar tree adorned the tail. At the ame time, the astute Freddie Laker had leased the remanufactured VCIO prototype G-ARTA from BA amI immediately ub-Ieased it to IEAcomplete with OD-AFA registration. Thus, for part of 196 MEA had two VCI s on it Reet. adly, 9G-ABP was destroyed in military action at Beirut Airport on 2 December. Fortunately, the aircraft was empty. G-ART A, or 00AFA, was returned three weeks later at the end of her twelve-month lease period.

CHAPTER EIGHT

Maintaining the AirfraDle Identifying Problem Areas Despite the fact that the VCIO was partly hewn from solid, and that it was, without doubt, the strongest airframe of its genre, no aircraft is immune from problems. During the VCIO's service life, borh its Inanufacturer and main airline operator BOA instigated a programme of monitoring and fail-safe led replacement precaution. With two static test airframes at Weybridge, G-ARTA kept busy flying, and the introduction into service of the early model BOAC Standard V lOs, it

became possible to rredict the likely areas of airframe wear. By subjecting the in-service airframes to ultrasound te ting and minute, microscopic inspection and sampling, most problems were spotted and resolved before they became serious. As the hours and flight cycles built up, BOAC and BAC created their own VC I0 structural analysis programme. Thus it was that it became possible to extend the aircraft's major structural insrection schedule from 4,000 hours to 6,000 hours - in a time period far shorter than on any orher airliner.

MEA VC10 on approach.

The MEA 707s were then on hand and the intriguing story of the MEA V lOs was over.

Livery There was one version only: white-topped fuselage to bright red cheatline with pinstripe red and white trimming; light grey undersides; white tail nn with red circle enclosing large green-coloured MEA cedar tree emblem; white tailrlane;

Middle East airline /Air Liban titling to engine pods; MEA titles to forward upper fuselage; national cript in white within red chearline. ore: Ghana lease aircraft carried Ghana Airways emblem on rear fuselage.

Fleet Details 9G-ABP. Ghana Airways second Type 1102 c/n 824. First flight 21 May 1965. To Ghana Airways. Leased to MEA

I April 1967, in full MEA livery, retained Ghana Airways registration. Destroyed in Beirut Airrort arrack 2 December 1968. OD-AFA, previou Iy G-ARTA c/n 3. First flight 29 June 1962. Vickers Type 1100 prototype then development airframe. Rebuilt to Type 1109 spec in 1966/67. Leased to Laker Airways, then suh-Ieased as OD-AFA to MEA for 12month period from I January 1968. old to BCALon I February 1969 as G-ARTA. W/O January 1972.

The ex-BUNBCal Standard VC10 which served with the Sultan of Oman's Royal Flight. The 'Vickers family look' windscreen design is clearly evident. Note the in-board wing fences and leading edge splitters.

146

147

Areas of high tre s, such as the undercarriage beams, tail-nn upport brackets, tailplane and main wing tanks and structure, were closely monitored. So too W'IT th' brakes, axles and undercarriage stays. The only noreworthy early service problems were with the brakes and undercarriage and axles - perhaps reflecting the VCIO's predominantly African operating environment. The runways were shorr, often badly surfaced and did not encourage long component life - despite the VCIO's compressor-assisted feather-light landing. Even the VCIO' strong structure took a beating on the'e runways and the lack of fatigue bending in the tandard' forward fuselage, de pite hundreds of positive touchdowns on African runways, was a te tament to the airframe. In fact, the longer-bodied uper model, did suffer from nose-nodding on take-off and landing due to its extended length forward of the wing, and a programme of in. pection was subsequently required. Following service entry, the inspection programme for BOAC Standards set the param'ters for all the programmes of all orher VC I0 users. There were early problems with oil seals and contamimHed ahin air systems, which stemmed from an unusual quality lapse on the part of the Rolls-Royce Conways' components suppliers fter a number of incidents which on occasion needed an emergency descent and cabin venting - the airline quickly addressed the probl m. imilarly, BOAC had a ra h of false warn ings concerning the VC I0- undercarriage. On one flight, BOA Flight Engineer David mith had to climb into a VCI 's lower-belly avionics bay over Bahrain and manually wind down the main gear until three green lights showed up on the flight deck. With holding fuel being used up and a degree of ten ion apparent, he had to work hard. Like orher BOAC VC 10 crews, he knew that there had been false gear warnings when, in reality, all was well and the 'Dunlops were dangling', as the phrase used to go.

MAINTAIJ ING THE AIRFRAME

MAINT INI 'G THE AIRFRAME

However, the Bahrain incident turned out to lefor real.

Other typical VC 10 service events included fouled Aap drives. The aircraft had a special system that sensed if any of the Aaps were out of synchronization and over-riding their gearboxes; the system then locked the Aaps where they were and avoided further d::lm
.. Conways paired. Note the Seddon airflow design and 15in stub wing.

Bulletins and Records Like all airliners, the VClO wa

ubject

to service bulletin - from its manufacturer in response to the ervice-life learning

/

The hot end - noisy but effective. Note the so-called 'beaver tail' fairing to reduce drag. The two pictures on this page are of aircraft in RAF service; in July 1999 the RAF passed two million hours' operating time on the Conway.

748

curve of the aircraft. By the time the VCIO had been in service for a couple of years, enough knowledge was gained to be able accurately to predict what might occur. By 1966, the VC I0 had starteJ to notch up a typical service and incident record with BOAC and the other operators. With hard use, a few problems were hardly a surprise, yet such was the quality of the Vickers tructure that it would be 197 anything really noteworthy before occurred within the VCl s's structural records. On 30 April 1970, a service bulletin was issued drawing attention to tailplane pivot-bearing wear and an inspection and remedy programme was implemented. On 23 July 197 , a ervice bulletin alerted all VC 10 operator to cracks in the central fuselage torque box/keel area. teel reinforcements had to be added to what had originally been a light-alloy component area. On 12 October 1972, the CAA alerted operators to a degradation in rear-

fuselage skin strength and called for skin doublers; small stress cracks in the engine beams also appeared and engine beam cutout stiffeners were added. However, it was noted that, even with cracks found in this crucial area, such was the fail-safe inherent in the local structure that even a 2in crack would not render the aircraft unsafe. On 30 July 1973, a service bulletin noted minor cracks found in the main landing-gear areas of aircraft with 20, 0 33,00 hOLII"'.

Corrosion Major stru tural corrosion affects all airliners, yet the VCIO showed little sign of it. When the Boeing ompany purchased four BOAC tandard in part exchange for 747s, and broke them up at Heathrow, no major cracking or safety critical fatigue was found anywhere in the structure. It is a testament to the Vickers design, especially in view of the humid, corrosion-enhancing temperatures and conditions in hot and high environments in which these airliners had operated. Notably, the first significant structural corrosion alert to be issued on the VC I0 was twelve years into its service life - an impressive record. Then, fatigue was noticed in the lower central wing-hox transverse beams, and a repair programme was initiated. Around the same time, the VC I0, along with other airliners operating in it typical circumstances, wa found to have suffered from corrosion in the fuel tanks. This came from a green fungal sludge thar grew in such wet and warm conditions. Repairs were programmed for all VCIO operators.

The Vickers-design air-compressed main gear, with 10 degrees rake-back.

The RAF Fleet One of the mo t intere ting aspects of the VCIO's service life was the fact that BOAC worked hand in hand with the Royal irForceVClOAe t,creatingalerrs and solutions to their shared experiences. The R F maintained its VCIOs at its Brize Norton base in a hangar that was, at the time, the largest ever constructed in Europe, with the capacity to service a Aeet ofVCIO at the same time. The Air Force trained its own VCIO specialists, who concentrated on the aircraft and became experts at maintaining them. The RAF was virtually operating a troop- and staff-

Nose profile of the Omani Royal flight aircraft showing the pitot tubes and sensors.

transport airline, with regular routes and schedules, as well as using its VCI0s to fulfil Royal, Prime Ministerial and VIP roles, so it i not surprising that it maintenance standards for its Aeet were second to none. Within the RAF, W/O Mike Brokenshire MBE became known as the service' 'Mr V 10'. tarting out as an airframe fitter in 1956, Mike Brokenshire worked his way through the ranks and

749

through the RAF's Aeet, working on everything from nsons to Vampires and finishing his career with 101 quadron. In twenty year of fetrl ing the R F VC 10 , he saw the aircraft mature and the tanker conver ion arrive. He has describ dhow, apart from some hart episodes, the RAF's VCl s were remarkably trouble-free. Brokenshire's work covered the small number of RAF VCIO problems, including

MAINTAI 'ING THE AIRFRAME

'n8f1ped axle and fatigued windows, and oc urred on the RAF machine before contributed to their being over ome by they appeared on the civil aircraft. the creation and implementation of pre- Certainly, it was the RAF that upped the ventive measures. ome corrosion in the specification of the VCIO's oil grade on galleys and around the cargo doors, buffet- three occasions and it was the RAF that induced surface degradation in the noted that the roof mounting of the lift tailrlane and work on the cable runs were rafts was rather inconvenient! the highlights of the VCIO maintenance In servicing terms, the RAF instituted rroblems. In early oreration, the VCIO's a series of checks known as b8se checks Iiquid oxygen cabin air ystem suffered with varying number added to the Bas~ from leaks and needed re-charging. The prefix in order to denote at what depth RAF also discovered, as had BOAC, that of maintenance the airframes were being re-treaded tyres on the nose wheel should worked on - Base 3 was the heavy mainbe avoided due to the close proximity of tenance event and interval. the engines' intake' to any debris from a Mike Brokenshire' team created a burst tyre. spares rackage for the VCIO fleet, tailored The axle rroblem on the VC la's main to its flight operations. This included a undercarriage rear bogie gear was found standard srare-parts kit for each aircraft on VC Ia XR 09 when the ax Ie snapped that ensured that it stood a good chance off flush with the wheel and left it of getting it elf home from some remote hanging. luckily, the incident did not rerting. Brokenshire accompanied many take rlace on landing. Within one week, VCtO Royal and VIP flights as the onall the RAF VCI s were changed and board technical exrert, ready to deal with then a modified axle entered service any snags. highlighting the Brize Norton team's The RAF al 0 designed its own moniability to re-manufacture VCIO rarts, and toring and samrling schedule, including, the RAF's ability to solve problems in 1972, the creation of special techniques qui kly. for changing the rail plane on the VCIO. The RAF machines, with their srecial This included a method of chemically Standard VC Ia bodies, the wing and free:ing ami shrinking the tailrlane main engines from the Super model, along with rivot and then inserting it when cold the tai !cone-mounted 'lUX iIiary power ensuring a stress-free fitting. The RAF was unit, were more complex than the stan- also at the forefront of solving rroblem dard-is ue airline VCIOs. imilarly, the with the locking and ealing mechanism R F machines led a tougher life and also of the VCI cargo door, which, given incorporated the cargo-handling floor. that the RAF made far more use of this This, combined with higher annual feature than any other operator, was to uti Iization rates meant that some problems be expected.

750

In years of V 10 engineering maintenance, Mike Brokenshire can recall only one incident when an RAF VC 10 was strand d far from home with a major technical problem. This happened when the flaps fouled their tracks and damaged the fu elage of a VC 10 that was visiting Wake Island. He also tell how the RAF had no rroblem with the aircraft' central keel, and never bent an engine beam. For the RAF, Conway engines were very reliable and the VCI 's airframe could absorb damage and carry it until reaching a repair station. That airframe strength has also reassured crews in moment' of severe turbulence and bad flying conditions. In RAF and airline terms, the VClO, unlike the ubiquitous 707, did not have the luxury of being able to share srare parts and rerair facilities with other airline operating similar equipment. With the excertion of occasional joint hell' in Africa, V las had to carry their problems on an allowable defiCiency list that preserved safe operation yet made onward flight rossible. The airliner therefore had to have more redundan y and more reliability built into it than other types. Apart from the obvious and real rroblems and events involved in operating any large jet airline transport tyre, the VCIO had an excellent airframe and maintenance record and never suffered from a de ign-caused structural failure. Few hard-worked, heavily used and highpowered airframes can match either that achievement, or the VCIO's in-service life record of reliability and safety.

CHAPTER NINE

Incidents Few aircraft escape being involved in an accident, and the more numerou the example of the aircraft, the more one is likely to be in the headline after an incident. The VCIO suffered a number of incidents, and, sadly, two crashes that involved loss of life. The aircraft was also involved in more than its fair share of terrorist-related events, tend ing arti ficiall y to inflate its record of hull losses in service. In real terms, the VC I was both lucky in its survival rates, and re ponsible for the fact that it survived - through good design - in a eries of events that could otherwise have added to its airframe loss figures. Certainly, in BOAC and B hands, it ncver caused harm to anyone and, with two exceptions, other users of the VCtO could claim th same achievement.

Engine Failures In BOAC service, both the tandard and uper model suffered from a number of uncontained engin failures. As is so oftcn the case, these mostly took place after the strcss of take-off. In some incidents, 8n engine would have suffered from overtemper8turing, surging, vibration or minor fan-blade damage, which, although not terminal and catastrophic, would have led to the need to hut down the engine in a containable incident. Bird strike, notably in frica, were common but, like the aforementioned, they rarely caused an engine exrlosion. However, BOAC did record several incidents of massive engine explosions, with large parts of the engine leaving the airframe and having the potential to damage the adjoining engine. In one incident, a shaft-bearing failure in the inner com pre or tage of a Conway engine left a mas ive hole between the outboard engine of G-A Gl's starboard outer engine and the tub wing, where the major portion of the inner starboard engine had

departed the airframe. The enginemounting beam was buckled through 90 degrees and just managed to hold the outer engine assembly in place. Ea t African Airway and Ghana Airways also experienced such engine failures. The EAA incident was qually catastrophic and, once again, Vickers design and superb airmanship saved the day. Such events were rare, but quite normal for any aircraft in its service life. The fact that the VCIO survived intact was another tribute to the Vicker' design team; the 'VCIO-ski', or Russian VCIO copy that was the Ilyushin 11-62, ould rarely deal with them. In an identical incident, a Super VCIO suffered an similar engine burst over Reading in Berkshire. luckily, the Conway engine landed in a field at the edge of the town. A bird strike also affected a Standard VCIO climbing out of alisbury (Harare), and the same thing happened in India. On both occasions, the fully fuelled VCIO managed to limp around and dumr fuel before coming in on what must have been a pretty hot and hairy (as opposed to hot and high) landing. Over the South China Sea, on a night flight en route from Hong Kong to Tokyo with just a few passengers aboard, a BOAC VC10 (G-ASGl, 1974) suffered a fuel transfer urset that caused all four engines to run down. Prompt action by the crew led to the deployment of the emergency ElRAT (electrical ram air turbine), and its rower was u cd to generate the engine re-light procedure. (The ElRAT later failed in flight due to overrevving, but it had already fulfilled the 'one-off' emergency use for which it was designed.)

Incidents - Rare and Routine The pate of undercarriage problem in early 1964/65 had sometimes been false alarm, and ometimes real. It was very real when, on approach to Salisbury Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), the flight-

757

deck lights said that the gear was unsafe on a tandard model VCIO. With the aircraft depressuri:ed and in the holding rattern, something had to be done to ascertain just what configuration the aircraft was in. At this stage, the VCIO only had an urper-surface periscore; as a result of this rarticular incident, a lowersurface underbelly reriscore was retro-fitted to the BOAC early model Standards. The Flight Engineer and the crew had no way of knowing, and cycling the gear made no difference. The Flight Engineer had to descend into the lower belly, remove the small fuselage access panel, and, with two stewards holding him tight, stick his head out to look under the aircraft l He could see that the gear was down - desrite indications to the contrary - was rulled back into the fu elage, replaced the panel, and told the astoni hed Cartain to land. Other incidents were more or less routine in airline orerations, including hailstorms, lightning strike, engine surges, forcign-object damage and rcjectcd rake-offs. Like every other airliner, the VClO was involved in a number of near misses, the closcst call perhaps befalling the RAF, when onc of its VCIO was over the Atlantic Ocean. On 30 Decemher 19 ,in visual flight conditions, an airtraffic control event caused an American Airline DC-IO to scythe pa t the rear of the RAF V 10 as it crossed the DC-I 's rath. It was so close that the DC-IO crew felt the buffet from the V I ' wake and the ATC readout allegedly convergcd. Clearly, luck was with both aircraft on that day. The prototyre VCIO, G-ARTA, was written off at Gatwick in 1972 when it bounced in gusting winds on landing and twisted it central keel backbone and fuselage kin beyond economic repair. It was positioning back from a diversion at the time and wa empty except for the flight crew. Intere tingly, BOAC did a similar thing to a uper VCI in the Caribbean

INCIDENTS

in the late 1970s; after spend ing several weeks in the sun while its fate was pondered, the aircraft was repaired. British United Airways came closest ro a terrible disaster through no fault of its own in the late 1960s when its Standard model G-ASIX en route from Chile to Argentina across the Andes was dashed from the sky by CAT, or clear air turbulence, above the mountain peaks. The aircraft was thrown up on to its side at a 90-degree-plus bank angle and then tossed, headlong, nose down towards the peaks a few thousand feet below. (The mountains reaching up towards 27,000ft placed them close at hand, even for a high-Aying jetliner.) With the powered controls knocked out and the VCIO gyrating and twisting, the crew made a miraculous recovery - first regaining control with virtually no Aying surface assistance, and then resetting the PCUs to kick the control surface authority back. They landed at their destination safely. It had been a very close call, and one crew member had sustained an injury from being thrown across the cabin. After a thorough ground check, the aircraft was despatched on its next Aight back home to Gatwick. Only there did detailed engineering inspection reveal a fracture in one of the tail-fin support spars, which needed lengthy repair. The incident proved just how strong the VCW was. Other aircraft in similar situations have lost structural integrity and crashed; an aircraft with wing pylon-mounted engines might possibly have snapped the engine mounting fuse pins on several, if not all those engines as they were spun around a central axis as the airframe pitched and tossed. The consequences are obvious and the rear-engined design and build of the VCIO saved such a thing happening that day. Certainly, members of the Vickers team have stated that that is their view; surely the crew agree I Other VCIOs were not so lucky. Weeks after buying the BOAC Standard model G- RVA, Nigeria Airways lost the airframe and its crew and passengers during a bad-weather approach to Muhammed Murtala Airport, Lagos. Registered 5 -ABD, the aircraft was serving the usual Heathrow-Gold Coast WT925 Aight run and was due to break out of the dank African morning sky at just after 7am local time on 20 November 1969 Flown by an ex-BOAC pilot, the VCI0 ploughed into treetops in very poor

visibility without the aid of a ground-proximity warner or an ILS system. Sadly, there were no survivors by the time the rescue services reached the area, some eight miles from the runway. Although some passengers may have survived the impact, a subsequent fire had consumed 5 -ABD and all on board. There have been various suggestions as to the factors that contributed ro the accident. It seems to have resulted from a combination of let-down procedure events and the bad weather, allied to a non-ILS straight-in approach from ATC; certainly, the aviation community learned lessons from the accident in relation to controlled Aight inro terrain parameters.

Super Model Written Off The VClO stayed out of the headlines until 18 Apri I 1972, when the first Super model airframe was written off. This fate befall the East African Airways Super VCIO registered 5X-UVA, as it took off from Addis Ababa en route to London. At high speed, close to the VI call-out, a large report was heard followed by severe vibration. The steering failed and the aircraft became unmanageable. Clearly, something was wrong and the handling pilot rejected the take-off. Such decisions at high speed always put a pilot in a difficult position - to go or not to go? Whether to abort take-off has been the subject of much international debate since the crash. On the day, the Captain stopped the aircraft from leaving the ground in an unknown state of damage while suffering from an unexpected and instantaneous problem. There was no obvious diagnosis quickly to hand, and he had no idea whether the aircraft's ability to fly was compromised. He clearly acted sensibly, even if some have used hindsight to suggest that the aircraft would have Aown if it had continued to rotation point and climbed our suffering major damage, wh ich mayor may not ha ve then caused the aircraft to crash. Such pointless speculation continues to this day. Sadly, 5X-UV A had hit debris on the runway - it had been dropped by a previous aircraft - and the VClO had lost its steering when the nose-wheel tyres had been punctured. Foreign-object damage from the VC 10's burst tyre had also been caused to the engines; this was a familiar problem, hence the limitations placed on

752

INCIDENTS

re-treaded tyres being used on VCW nose gear. This, coupled with a maintenancerelated problem in the aircraft's main gear brakes, which, unbeknown to the crew, dramatically reduced braking effectiveness, meant that 5X-UVA could not stop. The official enquiry blamed the aircraft's inability to srop on errors in the brake servicing. The initial cause of the tyre burst was found to be a Iight-aircraft jack rod fouling the runway. Some passengers survived but, of the 107 on board, 43 were killed by fire or impact. Matters had been compounded by the fact that the ground terrain beyond the runway was unlandscaped, and a storm drain and rough ground meant that there was no smooth over-run area. The VC 10 was pitched about, and broke up. Its strong structure undoubtedly played a part in the survival of many of the passengers. Even after the crash and the fire, the centre fuselage reinforcing hoops srood proud. Sadly, some who escaped were trapped by the airport's perimeter fence as fuel Aooded from the wings.

Beirut ro London, was blown up; all on board escaped with their lives and the aircraft burnt out down to its lower fuse-

lage, and beyond repair. A single window pane and its milled surround, painted in BOAC blue, remain today in the Dutch

Terrorist and Military Action Fortunately, from 1972 onwards, right up until its commercial retirement, the VCIO suffered no further accidents. However, it was targeted by terrorists more than once. As early as December 1968, a VCIO the MEA machine leased from Ghana Airways (9G-ABP) - had been destroyed by military action at Beirut Airport. Then, in September 1970, the BOAC Super VCW G-ASGN was hijacked and Aown to Dawsons Field in Jordan, along with the crews and passengers of a Swissair DC8 and a TWA 707. After a terrible ordeal trapped in the sweltering airliners for days, the passengers were released from all three aircraft, which were then blown to pieces. The image of the BOAC Super VCIO's blue and gold-trimmed tail breaking off amid the smoke and sand dunes was Aashed around the world. Interestingly, it was researchers' later discovery that the passengers on the British aircraft had suffered lower stress levels and less discomfort than those in the American aircraft, with the Swiss passengers setting a median average between the two. Four years later, another BOAC Super VCIO was hijacked and Aown to Amsterdam. There, G-ASGO, Aying ex-

753

National Aviation Museum at Schiphol as a tribute ro the aircraft and as a reminder of its fate.

THE RAF AND THE velo

CHAPTER TEN

The RAF and the VC 10 Few other civil-type airframes have been used to the ame extenr in a military capacity as the VC10. The Boeing 707 wa widely used in a military transport role, but its roots were in a military application. In a related, yet different context, Vickers always considered the possible

military application of its transport types - not least with a view to securing further orders from a government, and therefore making more money. The VC10 story turned out somewhat differently from how things had originally been envisaged.

The Aircraft The cancellation of the RAF's V 1000 (spe ification 1230) aircraft, and the rebirth of an aircraft to fill that need as the RAF VClO (to meet specification C239), gave rise to the initial order for five VC10

--Inside Base Hangar at Brize with a 'shiny ten' undergoing servicing work.

C Mkls by the RAF in eptember 1961. While it is true that the later VC10 aircraft not wanted by BOAC were made over the RAF, it is also true that an RAF transport role for the VC 10 was part of the story from day one. As such, the making over of surplu airline airframe at a later date i' not enormously significant; in other words, the VC 1a was always an RAF aeroplane. At the time of its entry into service, it was also the largest airframe ever operated by the RAF. The RAF V las were rather speci'll. They featured the shorter, Standard model VC 10 fuselage, yet had the more powerful uper model .43 engines (of which the military cle'ignation was -3 I), and the uper model" reprofi led wi ng. The fin tank, forward cargo door, reinforced floor and the Artouste auxiliary power unit in the tailcone made these aircraft far more independent, and gave them the abi Iity to operate to remoter

The RAF's definitive VC1D C Mk 1.

154

airfields with only military standards of servicing. The early RAF model VC 1as rarely used their in-built nose-mounted infl ight refuell ing probes (which were detachable), but this feature came to prominence in later years and via the tanker programme. The mo t notable inervice structural difference in the RAF VClO was the trengthened cabin floor, which could carry loads, including vehicles, without the need for spreaders. rollerball-type floor-manoeuvring system was also fined. The RAF air raft could be fitted out in an all-passenger configuration, in cargo/passenger mix, or as an aerovac flying ambulance for casualty removal from anywhere in the world. This saw up to a full load of 76 tretcher cases being carried or, more commonly, a combined load of 36 stretchers with 70 passenger. As with the commercial varianrs, the aircraft brought new standards for RAF

155

personnel and passengers. Notably, the aircraft were kitted out with rearwardfacing passenger seats in order to meer MoD safety requirements. Similarly, the RAF transport versions featured a sear pitch that was more generou than normal commercial rule' provided. The first RA F VC 1as - designated C Mk 1 - were registered XR 06 and XR 07. XR 6 achieved it fir t flight in late 1965 and testing in early 1966. The RAF, like the airlines, had a team of men resident at the Vickers plant, who had been involved with the RAF VC10 development. After an impres ive handing-over ceremony, 10 quad ron took its first VC I0, and the RAF moved on from Comets, Britannia, Beverleys and Belfa ts, into a big-jet world. Within two years, the RAF had received all fourteen of its C Mkl VCIOs and had named them after a selection of Victoria ross winners from the service.

THE RAF AND THE VCIO

These names were painted on the fuselage close to the VC1O's main forwardcabin entry door. The 1 quadron VC I wore a smart white and grey fu elage paint cheme, divided by a blue cheatline that included a styli h zig:ag-style 'flash' de ign. In later years they, like the subsequent VC 10 tankers, took on a more subdued livery.

Brize Norton and the VCIOs' Duties Based ar RAF Brize orton in Oxfordshire, which became 10 Squadron's main V 10 base, rhe RAF fleer performed all

manner of tasks. From serving the end-ofEmpire RAF ba e in the ear and Far Ea t, to providing VIP and Royal Flights, and including ma sive troop and service personnel movement capacity, the upport{fransport Command of the late 196 sand 1970 was the es ence of the RAF VCIO story. Whether they were rescuing injured servicemen or civilians, moving oldiers, or transporting supplies, the VCIO have een service in all the major wars and theatres of conflict and concern in which the RAF has been involved since the 1960s, including the Falklands and Gulf Wars. As a national and service icon, the sight of the RA F VC 1Os has become

THE RAF AND THE VCIO

etched in the national p yche - returning hostage home, carrying Prime Ministers and Royalty, and moving ervices familie. V 10 of the RAF, performing one role or another, have often appeared on the front page of the world's new papers and, until recently, were a regular sight at heads-of-state meeting the world over. At Brize orton, the RAF constructed Base Hangar, the biggest hangar in Europe. From within its depths, a VClO servicing, maintenance and operations structure was created, under the Brize Norton Engineering Wing, thm rivalled those of the best airlines in the world. Indeed, the RAF VC10s were run like those of an airline, with a daily and weekly

Something different - the ex G-ATDJ in service with the RAE.

departure to all points on rhe service's international network. The main, regular R F V 10 trooping routes were to Hong Kong via Singapore, Gan and Bahrain, and, in rhe opposire direction, to New York and Washington. Troops, service families, diplomar , high-ranking offi er, MoD staff and many more people made up the core passenger load for uch services. At rheir height, the e ervices operated on a daily basis. imilarly, daily flight to the British bases in Wesr G rmany were a regular theme of the VC1O's Brize orton service. In it 1970 heyday, thi Vel service carried 10,00 passengers a month, and aircraft utilization figures were up to around 200 hours per month. Gan, Akroriri, Hong Kong, Muharraq, Gatow, ellis and many others witnessed many RAF VC10 memories.

The RAF cargo door and rearwards-facing seats.

756

The Mkls fearured airline-sryle interior for their trooping flights, and a full complement of crew - stewarde ses, loadmasters and stewards - worked the RAF VCIO routes of the period. Until noise regulations and the co t of fuelling the uprated Conway became prohibitive factors for the RAF's own VCIO airline network, the aircrafr were regular ights in the U A. Throughout the late 1960 and 1970, it was also po ible to 'commute' around the world by VC10, via rhe end-of-Empire Briti h Commonwealth base. ever before had the RAF been able to offer such a service, with an aircrafr that could perform 0 reliably and so consistently, day in, day out, with such loads and at such speed. Although operating at a lower pace in the 1990s, not least due to fuel-cost

757

considerations, the RAF C Mk Is which have all been converted to CI K specification, have life left in them and will surely he around for some years to come. In the end, one rhing will he for certain, for the RAF and I quadron, the arrival of rhe VCl changed their world.

Royal Air Force VC I0 Fleet Details (Transport/Support Command) Note: All original to .1 K. type pec.

s upgraded

XR 06 c/n 830{f ype 1106. First flight 26 November 1965. c.l. George Thomp on Vc.

THE RAF AND TilE VelD

XR 807 c/n n(fype 1106. First flight 25 March 1966. c.l. Donald Garland VC(fhomas Gray vc. XR 0 c/n 2 (fype 1106. Fir t flight 9 June 1966. .1. Kenneth Campbell Vc. XR 09 c/n 29(f ype 1106. First flight 2 July 1966. c.1. Hugh Malcolm V . Became G-AXLR RB211 testbed. crapped Kemble, Glos. XR 10 c/n 3 (fype 1106. First flight 29 ovemb'r 1966. C.I. David Lord Vc. XV 101 c/n 3 I(fype 1106. First flight J 1 January 1967. c.l. Lanoe Hawker Vc. XV 102 c/n 832/Type 1106. First flight 5 May 1967 c.l. Guy Gibson Vc. XV 103 c/n 833(fype IJ06. First flight 14 June 1967. c.l. Edward Mannock Vc. XV 104 c/n 834/Type 1106. First flight 14 July 1967. c.1. James McCudden Vc. XV 105 c/n 835/Type 1106. First flight 3 October 1967. c.l. Albert Ball Vc. XV 106 c/n 36(fype J 106. First flight 17 ovember 1967. C.1. Thomas Mottershead Vc. XV 107 c/n 37(fype 1106. First flight 22 March 196 . c.1. James icol on Vc. XV 108 c/n 3 (fype 11 6. First flight 7 June 196. .1. William RhodesMoorhouse VC. XV 109 c/n 39(fype 1106. First flight 1 July 196 . C. I. Arthur carf Vc.

Tanker Conversions Type 1164 K.3 ZA 147 K.3 ex-EAAC ZA 148 K.3 ex-EAAC ZA 149 K.3 ex-EAAC ZA 150 K.3 ex-EAAC

5H-MMT 5Y-ADA 5X-UVJ 5H-MOG

Type 1112 K.2 ZA 140 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VL ex-BOAC ZA/DI41 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VG ex-BOA ZA/D 142 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VI ex-BOAC ZA/D 143 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VK ex-BO ZA/D 144 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VC ex-BOAC Type 1170 KA ZD 24 KA ex-BOAC ZD 241 KA ex-BOAC ZD 242 KA ex-BOAC ZD 230 KA ex-BOAC ZD 235 KA ex-BOAC

G-A GL G-ASGM G-ASGP G-ASGA G-ASGG

-

The Multi-Role VClD At the beginning of the 1960s, Vickers (BAC) had envisaged an expanded military role for the VCI O. In all, half a dozen military variant theme' were po tulated. (The idea of an in-flight refuelling tanker role for the VC I airframe came to fruition years later.) Unfortunately, particularly in the light of the imrod experience, the idea of an early-warning type maritime-reconnaissance VC I did not leave the drawing board. It would surely have only been a small leap to envisage and engineer an A WACS early-warning VCIO derivative. In view of the costs eventually incurred by the RAF, the Government and the taxpayer in following other routes for these specifications, it 'eems a shame that the VC to variants of these ideas did not fly. More intriguingly, plans were drawn up to make the VCIO into a long-range bomber. aturally, with the massive performance reserves that were inherent in it, the VCto could carry a great deal of payload and Vicker envisaged strengthening the wings with 'hard' points to carry Douglas kybolt air-launched ballistic missiles. In bomber mode, eight 1,0001b bombs could have been uplifted in eight epa rate wing-mounted panniers, with an all-up payload of 64,000Ib. In a maritime role, anti-submarine/sonar, buoy, ECM aerials and rescue equipment would have been carried, as well as internal long-range fuel tanks mounted in the fuselage to give a longer range (up to 6,000 miles). All of these variants would have required fuselage and nose modifications. Indeed, for its multi-role variant as an in-flight refueller, the plans at the time specified a double row of internal fuel rflllks in the cabin/hull. The'e would have carried more fuel than the single row of cylindrical fuel tanks that were fitted later to the definitive VCIO K.2 and K.3 tankers.

-

The Tanker Programme The idea for a VCI tanker was not new, and, two decades after the concept was first mooted, a vcr ion of this pipe dream became reality. Vickers had had a long association with the RAF's AAR flightrefuelling squadron through the Valiant, and it seems both poignant and relevant

158

that the Valiant's succe sol' in terms of airframe size - the VC I0 - should take up thi role via a route from civil airframe u e to military. The idea for a VC 10 tanker fleet had first been discu sed within the MoD in the late 1970 , and it came to fruition in 197 when the Labour Government gave its backing to an update on RAF in-flight refuelling capacity. Clearly, in airframe fatigue/cycle terms, the writing was on the wall for the venerable Victors that were the mainstay of the RAF's air-to-air refuelling programme. It was suggested that a revived squadron should handle this revitalization of RAF tanker and VC I0 capabi Iity. The costs were to be met by the taxpayer, and, relative to the expansion of apability, the new idea would be cheaper and quicker. It was suggested that KC 135 tankers could be bought off the shelf from Boeing, but the VC I0 offered advantage through its design. Most notably, putting aside the boom and hose techniques that were each preferred by the Americans and British re pectively, the VCIO offered a much more stable platform as a refueller. Due to the clean wings and high- et tail, there wa Ie' interference drag to buffet the receiving fighters and far Ie s chance of an in-flight collision between the receiving aircraft and the tanker. Fighter pilots speak highly of the V 10 as a tanker, commenting that the type's configuration allows plenty of margin for error and accident in the refuelling flight envelope. Certainly, in cloudy or turbulent conditions, the extra space around the VCIO's airframe is beneficial for any fighter trying to link up to it in difficult circumstances. There was also, yet again, a political perspective, but this time it could be said to have worked in the VCIO's favour for once. By ordering and creating a rebuilding programme of redundant civil VCIO , and converting them into rankers, many jobs and industries were saved and more money spent in the home industrial economy. The fact that VC I0 tankerconversion costs soared was due to more than one factor, and cannot be blamed on anyone individual or their decision '. The BAC (BAe) plant at Filton (Bristol), and the remains of the Weybridge drawing office, got down to engineering the creation of the VCIO's after-life. With a pile of redundant exBritish Airways (BOAC) and EAA Super

The RAF VC10 tanker conversion takes flight. Note the wing pods and revised rear fuselage structure.

VCtOs, wndard VCtos (via Gulf Air as well), they had plenty of metal to be getting on with. The fact that the BA machines had been lying dormant in the open air for years at RAF Abingdon, and were in a very sorry state, led to a number of factor that marked the programme. Not least of these was the fact that these aircraft had to be cleaned, refitted, and made to fly. Furthermore, crews had to be found who would be willing to fly them down to

Filton - it was not an easy or very safe task. A massive rebuilding programme led to each of the pare V LO airframes being stripped down to bare metal, and reskinned in vital area. pars, slats, flap tracks, pressure hulkheads, keels, stringers and floors all had to be checked and repaired. Tail spars, fin-support brackets, elevators, tailplanes and engine struts all received microscopic examination and repair. Some of the airframes were in

159

remarkably good shape, while others had uffered from a hard life and required a greater degree of re-manufacturing than had been predicted. The EAA and Gulf Air machines, with their higher flight cycles and often with 50,000 on the airframe, needed particular examination during a period from 19 0-93. Another problem was that the airframes represented differing marque variants of the V 10. Thus, while the existing RAF

THE RAF AND THE VCIO

THE RAF AND THE VCIO

Rotate! Seen here off on another trip to the North Sea refuelling areas, ZA 147 used to fly over Africa.

With a single drogue trailing ZA 141, in its unique livery, performs for the camera.

VCIO C Mkls were special one-offs with the Super VClO wing and engines allied to a fin fuel tank, the BOAC Stand<1rds (ex-Gulf Air) were of the early VllOl design. Similarly, some of the Supers (exE A) had cargo doors and some (ex-BOAC) did not. As a consequence, different Aoors and fuselage apertures were installed. There was a worthwhile point in re-engining the Standards to RAF COAJ standard, bllt not in changing their

tails to include a fin tank. Thus it was that the initial variants were evolved into the K2 and KJ designation, with a later K4 variant also appearing (from the exBOAC Supers). Apart from the K4s, all the aircraft received an identical cabin tanking system. The longer Supers could have carried more, but did not. Each fuselage was fed a row of five cylindrical tanks mounted on a crashproof keel and frame with internal bags

760

carrying the fuel load. These combined with the VCIOs existing wing and fuselage tankage. Extra pipework also added to the structural re-working, so that the result was not dissimilar to the original LongRange, or LR, VCIO, with its add-on tanks, which was drawn up for commercial service. The tanks were refuelled from a central riser valve in the mid-belly section (wheel bay). Extra fuel boost tanks in the original wing tanks permitted faster fuel

XV 103 'Edward Mannock VC', one of the few remaining white-topped RAF VC10s. Behind is Base Hangar at Brize Norton.

767

THE RAF A

THE RAF AND THE VelD

D THE velD

One of the original VC10 C Mk ls, now upgraded to CK Mk 1 standard.

XVI03

Brize Norton VC10s rest under the classic tail of XV 103.

Super VC10 ZA 147 - formerly EAA's 5H-MMT - prior to another sortie from Brize Norton. The aircraft now has 48,000 hours 'on the clock'; it is certified to 60,000 hours,

762

transfer for the intended role. otably, the tanker itself could be refuelled via its own refuelling probe. The VCIO tanker offered three trailing drogues - one outboard on each wing and one from the rear fuselage. The rear-fuselage HDU fuelling position required extensive redesigning to accommodate it and, at great expense, new pressure bulkheads and floors were installed. Further tail area work saw the provision of the auxiliary power unit, to match that fitted to the original RAF VC10s. With its long hose drogues, mounted well clear of its structure, the VC I a offered

an excellent platform for fuel transfer. From on board, the process was monitored via a belly-mounted CCTV camera. The front of the cabin was kitted out with a small seating capacity to allow the aircraft to carry its own supplementary crew. The avionics update included TACAN, VI-IF/UHF and ADF facilities, alongside a nose-mounted weather radar. During the Gulf War, the active fleet received various radar specification updates. The converted VCIO airliners went into service with 10 I Squadron in 1984, with more joining the squadron as the tanker conversion programme ran its

763

course. Previously performing a wide variety of roles, the squadron became the VCIO AAR (air-to-air) refuelling icon, and has carried out vital tasks on a global basis. Day-to-day training sorties are the lifeblood of RAF life, and the VC10s set out on refuelling jobs that replenish a huge variety of types. The squadron has also ranged acros the Pacific Ocean on demonstration and exercise tours, as well as being a frequent flyer in North Atlantic Oceanic airspace. The 101 Squadron VCIOs performed a vital role in the initial Gulf conflicts and in the subsequent political skirmishing.

THE RAF AND THE velD

THE RAF AND THE velD

This historic squadron, re-formed for the VClO task, was IT-sited at Brize Norton for commonality of tasking with the VC10-equipped 10 Squadron. Formed on 12 July 1917 as the Royal Flying Corps' second specialist night bombing outfit, 101 Squadron Aew Blenheims, Wellingtons and Lancasters during World War Two. During the Falklands War the squadron Aew the longest-ever bombing mission, flying its Vulcans to Port Stanley in the Falklands and back. This required seven in-Aight refuellings on each leg. 101 Squadron was officially re-formed on I May 1984 with VC10 K series tankers based at Brize Norton. [n the Iraqi war!O[ Squadron flew 390 missions in a two-manti, period, Ayi ng 1,371 hours - not bad for a Aeet of second-hand and hardly new converted airliners, even if they were VClOsl It took its last VC[O conversion in early [994 and, with continued government funding, is likely to remain a VCl 0 AAR unit until approximately the year 2004 at current estimates. By then, structural and engine implications will be foremost in the cost/ benefit analysis. The current VClO Aeet displays an all-over grey livery with a zigzagged chearline that reAects the original Transport/Support Command scheme of the [950s and [960s. Until a suitably configured replacement is found, the RAF is happy to remain the last operator of the VC10.

and damp environment, the adverse effects of which had been compounded by the sealing up of the aircraft. Internal COITOsion had taken place, and of the greatest concern was the level of degradation to the massive wing internal support torque box - the very heart of the VClO. These all had to be inspected and repaired prior to the Aight from Abingdon to Filton, and needed careful work to avoid overstressing or twisting the structure when its monocoque was opened up for internal repair - thus temporarily losing its selfsupporting capabilities. With the repairs made to those aircraft deemed to be worth saving, a series of ferry Aights - with gear, Aaps and slats all locked down in place - began. On the fifteen-minute 'hop' to Filton nothing went badly wrong and the ex-airline Super VC10s entered the hangar for the con ver-

radical surgery was not needed. Without the 3,500ga[ tanks, the KAs can still offer range and refuel[ing from their 17,925gal wing and belly tanks, as well as offering cabin seating for RAF crew and support team. Thus is was that the once glorious, bl ue ri band fron t-I ine sky liners that were the BOAC and British Airways Super VC[O Aeet ended their livcs: either melted down or once again majestically airborne, rebuilt and revitalized to create a new chapter in aviation history. [t seems both weird and wonderful to see them, now painted in RAF grey as they wing overhead, to think back on their blue and gold-liveried days of glory. Perhaps nor even the boffins at Vickers could have imagined such a fate for thcir magnificent airliner whcn they first dreamed it up back in 1956.

The Birdmen of Ancona An article that sums up 101 Squadron's affection for the VC10 appeared in the RAF Brize Norton magazine, Gateway. On detachment in Italy for the Kosovo campaign, one of the squadron's VCIDs had a sticky moment. Here is the story, as told by the pilot, Fit Lt Gary Weightman.

Transport to Tanker Via a Few Tribulations Today the R F operates a Aeet of twentyseven VC10s, these being the original C Mk 1 aircraft and the converted civilian airframes that have steadily filtered into the air-to-air refuelling Aeet that now forms the core of the RA F's long-range capa bil it ies. As already written herein, the VC 10 tanker Aeet is a firm favourite with the RAF. Yet the route to the VClO's success with the service was nor always an easy one. Over the course of a number of years the Aeet was created at Filton and th variants go up to the KA model - the ultimate Super VC10-derived RAF tanker. The former BOAC Standards that came to the RAF (via their Gulf Air days) may well have been old, but they were at least still airworthy - they had not stood and done nothing for years. The EAA Supers had led hard lives but were the youngest

sion process which would take between two and three years. During this time, much of the aircrafts' corroded wing panels fuel tanks and reinforcing structure was replaced and 'zero timed'. The scrapped aircraft were cut up and as many spares as possible gleaned from their remains. Thus of eleven survivors only five were saved. With major re-working to their structures including changes to the Aoors, bulkheads and skin plating, these KA machines swallowed up large amounts of MoD money. Because they did not have the cargo door option - as seen on the ex-EAA Super VC10s that had become K.3s - fitting internal tanks could have meant that, as with the K.2 version, a hole would have to be cut in the fuselage roof. However, it was decided nor to install internal tanking in the KAs, so this

RAF K.Mk 3 Super VelD tanker - an ex-EAA machine - displays its nose refuelling probe.

of the Vickers VClO production run, and again there was not a huge interval between their last commercial Aights and their conversion. ome of the EAA machines had [ow-time airframes. These airframes formed the K.2 and K.3 tanker Aeet which evolved between 1980-86. The story of the ex- BOAC Super VClOs that metamorphozed into today' KAs between 1990-96 is, however, rather d ifferent. These ex-BOAC/ British Airways machines had amassed a large number of hours on their airframes, but as with all old aircraft from top-quality airlines, they had been superbly maintained. Age is not

764

the only arbiter when considering the structural integrity of an aircraft: the type of use and the standards of maintenance are far more important. Thus these BA machines had been withdrawn from service and parked up. Incredibly, they sat at Abingdon and Brize Norton for over five long years while their fate lay in the hands of world affairs and MoD needs. There the rot set in and six of the eleven airframes had to be scrapped when they were inspected to see if they could form part of the tanker conversion programme. The surviving five aircraft had sat and sweated in a high condensation, rain-swept

It was to have been 101 Squadron's last mission of the Kosovo campaign out of Ancona 'Raffaello Sanzio' International - set up over Macedonia and refuel Spanish and US Navy FD-18 Hornets. The 0420 hours midsummer morning take-off was a bit of a bind but no real problem. It was the co-pilot's, Capt Tom Engles USAF, turn to operate so he lined us up with five minutes in hand and the tower cleared our departure. With the ever-impressive take off roar to give the Conway engines' wake up call to the locals, VC10 ZA 148 began to roll down the runway and I began the usual mantra. Just before rotating, on either side of the runway ahead, a large numberless flock of enormous-looking birds lifted out of the long grass. 'Oh ****dy hell! ... Rotate!' Nothing grabs your attention like half a dozen size XXL seagulls coming straight at you at 160 knots and exploding on the windscreen three feet in front of your face! With a 'thudathudathud' we passed through the flock as Tom eased us off the deck. They heard the impacts a quarter of a mile away in the operations shed and another crew saw our jet pass in a cloud of seagull bits and feathers! On the flight deck there were a couple of seconds' stunned silence before all those hours in the simulator kicked in. I selected the gear up and scanned the engine gauges before glancing over my shoulder at the Flight Engineer, Miles Flory. He was already checking his panel and confirmed that nothing majorly bad was occurring with the systems. Tom indicated all appeared OK with the handling so we decided to continue climbing straight ahead for now. I declared an emergency and advised the tower that we had suffered a multiple bird strike and would be returning sooner rather than later.

At this point Miles noted that the NO.1 engine was showing sign of possible imminent failure. As we had a good rate of climb and were through 1,000ft over the sea, I ordered a precautionary shutdown of NO.1. With the possibility of airframe damage in mind I elected to leave the flaps at take-off setting for now and level off clear of cloud at 5,000ft. Miles suggested that we start an immediate fuel dump in case things got any worse and I heartily agreed. As things settled down a plan of action was agreed. Tom and Doug Cooper, the Navigator, would establish a holding pattern so we could start our recovery as soon as the fuel dump was complete. I told the tower we would be for a straight in, self-position for the instrument landing system on runway 22 and suggested that they might want to check the runway for any bird strike debris. MALMA Gary Seward looked for any obvious signs of damage from the cabin windows and set up the rear periscope to check the engine intakes. He reported back that all appeared OK which was the first good news of the morning. We tidied up all our checks and action and when the fuel dump was complete I informed Ancona we were ready to start our recovery. Tom would have to fly the approach as my forward vision was obscured by the internal contents of a rudely awakened seagull. We touched down safely after just twenty-five minutes airborne. The cup of tea Gary Seward pressed into my hand at engine shutdown was the finest I have ever drunk. A walk round our jet showed multiple impact points on the nose radome and windscreen. The port slats had been struck, one of the starboard flap sections had been badly dented and there was a spectacular quantity of seagull allover the starboard undercarriage. It is probable that the aircraft's attitude at rotate had shielded the engines from significant bird strikes and the strength of the VC10 fuselage prevented major damage to the flight deck area. Everyone on the crew did their bit and it was a pleasure to fly with them. What of Ancona Airport's Bird Control Unit? Well, he doesn't start work until 8.30am.

765

Finale The end of the Vickers VC I 's commercial service represented the end of an era, yet the aircraft remains in military service, and will continue to do so beyond the millennium with its original airframe structure intact. Perhaps this use by the RAF is the most fitting tribute to the aircraft and its manufacturer, which always included the RAF's role in its plan for the V 10. In commercial terms, the life and times of the VCIO repre"ent one of the finest examples of the best of British engineering

expertise and it place in the world. adly, the VCIO flew into political and commercial events that were of the most damaging type, and surely were the worst of British. Few other industrial projects have been so publicly discussed, and so badly affected. The VC I0 marked the end of a new beginning. Sadly, it proved that the British have excellent ideas and talent to turn those ideas into reality - yet then, as so often with great British design, fail to follow through in development and marketing term.

Remember, the VCIO was the biggest airframe ever seen in Europe. Yes, the Brabazon was bigger, but it remained stillborn; that other large European airframe, the Airbus, came along much later. The VC I0 could not have happened without the Vickers air raft that went before it - notably the Viscount, Vanguard and Valiant (not forgetting the V1000 as well) - and it is fair to ay that without the VCIO, Concorde might not have been what it was. For in the VCIO, both design and manufacturing laid the groundwork

for th standards and technique een in Concorde. There was also a V 10-influenced hort-haul 'air-bus' type project that laid the groundwork among t even more political affairs, for the eventual Airbus airframe and Airbus Industrie concept. Add in the story of Vickers work on the cargo VCI and their cargo-handling system, allied to their idea for a pure cargo craft or freighter, and the future-vision of the VCIO and Vickers-Armstrongs is clear for all to ee. Yet this huge market was left to the 707 and DC-S freighter before the 747 expanded the cargo sector and made it its own. Blend in the VCIO composite rudder experiments and the structural integrity of the VCIO, and the achievement and the lost potential shine through. nd that i without mentioning the Vanjet in its twin-engined and tri-jet incarnations circa 1956, which could have secured a huge world market for Vicker in the same arenas that the 727, 73 7 and DC-9 made their own a decade later. Imagine if Qantas, ingapore Airlines, MEA, Pan Am and nited had all ordered mixed fleets of uper VCIOs, uper VCIOs with cargo doors and the pure, c1amshellno ed freighter version (which this book reveals for the first time) with its outtanding payload to range performance allied to tropical environment capabilities. Imagine, just as Flight International once did, if BOA had gone for an all- VCIO fleet that included convertible passenger/cargo Combi Super VClOs and a fleet of pure freighters. The success this could have been is surely underlined by what an airline like KLM did with its DC-Ss and convertible 747s. It would also have proved that the

success of the EAA Super VCIOs was not just a 'one-off'. imilarly, the sheer flexibility of the V 10 was underlined by Freddie Laker's BUA VCIO operations the doubters of the VC10 claiming that it ability and potential only existed in sub idised BOA hands. Think of the short-haul VCIO plying European high density commuter routes for KLM or BEA, imagine the same aircraft using its performance reserves to haul out of Denver to Miami for an American carrier. Inherent in these words are the reality that it was all planned for, discussed with the airlines and that the ba ic airframe existed and the tooling was already funded. Anyone who doubts the seriousness of these proposals and Vickers' intent towards then, now needs to look no further than the pages of this book to ee ju t what was possible and just what opportunitie were missed by others. The men of Vicker were artisans, craftsmen, engineers, designers and visualisers of the greate t skill. Their wartime and postwar work show ju t what talent and genius was contained within Vickers and within the British aviation industry at that time, They brushed off the knocks, the likes of Sir George Edwards and Ernest Marshall, and all the Vicker men, stuck with it and won through. Their biggest triumph, their apogee of the jet age was the VC I0, yet it was surrounded by the events of politiCS and airline life that must also have been one of their biggest knocks, one of the hardest th ings they had to bear. Even today, the loss to Vickers, through the actions of others, of the VCIO's potential, still causes pain and

Finale. VelD - the classic airliner shape - climbs out from London Heathrow.

766

767

upset, they were so proud 0 It, y'r ',IW their own countrymen do it harm. It ., perhaps ven pos ible to id ntl y a hange in the Briti h national psy h " hang· 111 the nation's mood and chara l'r, v hi h occurred at the same tim a th siess and debacle that was the I. nd of empire, and of an aviation indu try, and an end of wartime resolve and the beginning of a new era, all of thi i rolled into the time and tide of the VCIO story. adly, there is no longer a place for the type of standards and cost of design that the V 10 exemplifies. Marketing men and accountants would strip it bare, cut out the over-engineering and whittle it down to th basi bottom line product with basic reserves in all areas of design and performance. The difference is, the VCIO was not, ladie and gentlemen, a bottom line product' At the end, during the last commercial day of this strong yet elegant airframe, it i possible to look back and admire a majestic de ign of great integrity. It in pired in those who flew it - a pilots, rew or passengers - unprecedented respect. The VCIO impre sed everyone - from an African villager standing outside a mud hut and ga:ing up in awe a it roared overhead, homeward bound, to a Queen trusting her life to it. Through its fifty-four ai,{rames th is a irI iner made it mark upon the world in a manner that had not been seen before, and has not been seen since. Whatever the problems, whatever the arguments, the VCIO was, and is, a triumph. Excellence was expected and, in the V 10 and Super VC 10, excellence - and more - was delivered, in the ultimate airl iner of its age.

COMPLETE FL

GULF AIR

APPE DIX

COIllplete Fleet List and Details BOAC/BA STANDARD VC10 FLEET G-ARVA c/n 804. First flight 8 November 1962. BOAC. Sold as 5N-ABD then destroyed on approach to lagos, Nigeria 20 November 1969 In Nigeria Airways service. G-ARVB c/n 805. First flight. 21 December 1962. BOAC/BA Broken up 1976. G-ARVC c/n 806 First flight. 21 February 1963. BOAC/BA leased. Sold to Gulf Air as A40-VC 1974. Sold 1977. Then converted to K.2 for RAF as ZA 144. G-ARVE c/n 807. First flight 15 April 1963. BOAC/BA. Broken up 1976. G-ARVF c/n 808. First flight 6 July 1963. BOAC/BA. Sold 1974 to Abu Dhabi Royal Flight (UAE). Preserved West Germany (Museum) 1981. G-ARVG c/n 809. First flight 17 October 1963. BOAC/BA. To Gulf Air as A40-VG In 1975. Sold 1978. Then converted to K.2 for RAF as ZA141. G-ARVH c/n 810. First flight 22 November 1963. BOAC/BA. Broken up 1976. G-ARVI c/n 811. First flight 20 December 1963. To Gulf Air as A40-VI in 1975. Sold 1977. Then converted to K.2 for RAF as ZA142. G-ARVJ c/n 812. First flight 25 February 1964. BOAC/BA. To Qatar VIP Flight 1975. Sold 1982 to RAF for conversion programme spares ship. G-ARVK c/n 813. First flight 28 March 1964. BOAC/BA. To Gulf Air as A40-VK in 1975. Sold 1977. Then converted to K.2 for RAF as ZA143. G-ARVl c/n 814. First flight 2 June 1964. BOAC/BA. To Gulf Air as A40-Vl in 1974. leased to Air Ceylon 1978 Sold 1978. Then converted to K.2 for RAF as ZA 140. G-ARVM c/n 815. First flight 9 July 1964. BOAC/BA. 1979 to RAF Cosford Museum.

BOAC/BA SUPER VC10 FLEET G-ASGA c/n 851. First flight 7 May 1964. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. Stored Abingdon. Then converted to RAF as KA. G-ASGB c/n 852. First flight 30 April 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. S ored. Then to RAF as K.4 spares airframe. G-ASGC c/n 853. First flight 1 January 1965

BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. To IWM Duxford for static display/preservation. G-ASGD c/n 854. First flight 3 March 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored. Then to RAF as KA spares airframe. G-ASGE c/n 855. First flight 6 March 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. Stored. Then to RAF as airframe. G-ASGF c/n 856. First flight 24 March 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. Then to RAF as spares airframe. Flew last BA scheduled flight 29 March 1981. G-ASGG c/n 857. First flight 17 September 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored then to RAF as KA. G-ASGH c/n 858. First flight 2 October 1965. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored. Then to RAF as spares airframe. G-ASGI c/n 859. First flight 28 January 1966. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored. Then to RAF as spares airframe. G-ASGJ c/n 860. First flight 22 February 1967. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored. Then to RAF as spares airframe. G-ASGK c/n 861. First flight 1 September 1967. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored. Then to RAF as spares airframe. G-ASGl c/n 862. First flight 27 December 1967. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. Stored. Then to RAF as KA. Flew last-ever passenger flight - enthusiasts' charter 30 March 1981. G-ASGM c/n 863. First flight 25 February 1968. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored. Then to RAF as KA. G-ASGN c/n 864 First flight 1 May 1968. BOAC. Destroyed by terrorist action, Dawsons Field 13 September 1970. G-ASGO c/n 865. First flight 11 September 1968. BOAC. Destroyed by terrorrst action, Schiphol Airport 10 July 1974. Small window panel from fuselage exhibited at Netherlands Aviation Museum (Avlodome) Schiphol Airport. G-ASGP c/n 866. First flight 20 November 1968.BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1981. Stored. Then to RAF as KA. G-ASGR c/n 867. First flight 12 February 1969. BOAC/BA. Withdrawn 1980. Stored. Then to RAF as spares airframe.

768

BUA/BRITISH CALEDONIAN G -ASIW c/n 819. First flight 30 July 1964. BUA then BCAl as 'loch lomond'. Then to Air Malawi as 7Q-YKH 1974 Withdrawn from service in 1979, broken up in Malawi 1994/95. G -ASIX c/n 820. First flight 16 October 1964. BUA then BCAl as 'loch Maree'. Sold to Sultan of Oman as A40-AB in 1974. Withdrawn 1987, donated to Brooklands Museum Trust. Historic return/final flight 6 July 1987. G-ATDJ c/n 825. First flight 18 June 1965. ExGhana order as 9G-ABQ taken on as BUA then BCAl Type 1103 as 'loch Fyne'. Sold to MoDIRAE as XX914 1973 Broken up 1983 G-ARTA c/n 803. First flight 29 June 1962. Prototype, remanufactured as Type 1109 for Laker Airways 1968. leased to MEA as ODAFA in 1968. Then to BCAl as 'loch Ness' In 1969. Written off Gatwick on landing 28 January 1972; broken up.

EAST AFRICAN AIRWAYS 5X-UVA c/n 881. First flight 3 September 1966. To EAA. Destroyed on take-off, Addis Ababa 18 April 1972. 5H-MMT c/n 882. First flight 12 October 1966. To EAA. Returned to BAE May 1977. Then to RAF as VCl 0 K.3. 5Y-ADA c/n 883. First flight 21 March 1967. To EAA. Returned to BAE May 1977. Then to RAF as VC10 K.3. 5X-UVJ c/n 884. First flight 19 Aprrl 1969. To EAA. Returned to BAE 26 July 1977. Then to RAF as VC10 K.3. 5H-MOG c/n 885. First flight 16 February 1970. To EAA. Returned to BAE 3 August 1977. Then to RAF as VCl 0 K.3.

A40-VC, previously G-ARVC c/n 806. First flight 21 February 1963. To BOAC then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF as VCl 0 K.2. A40-VG, previously G-ARVG c/n 809. First flight 17 October 1963. To BOAC then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF as VC1 0 K.2. A40-VI, previously G-ARVI c/n 811. First flight 20 December 1963. To BOAC then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF as VCl 0 K.2. A40-VK, previously G-ARVK c/n 813. First flight 28 March 1964. To BOAC, then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF as VCl 0 K.2. A40-Vl, previously G-ARVl c/n 814. First flight 2 June 1964. To BOAC, then to Gulf Air October 1975. Then to RAF as VC1 0 K.2.

AIR MALAWI 7Q-YKH, previously G-ASIW c/n 819. First flight 30 July 1964. To BUA then BCAl. Sold to Air Malawi then scrapped 1994.

MIDDLE EAST AIRLINES 9G-ABP. Ghana Airways second Type 1102 c/n 824. First flight 21 May 1965. To Ghana Airways. leased to MEA 1 Aprrl 1967, in full MEA livery, retained Ghana Airways registration. Destroyed in Beirut Airport attack 28 December 1968. OD-AFA, previously G-ARTA c/n 803. First flight 29 June 1962. Vickers Type 1100 prototype then development airframe. RebUilt to Type 1109 spec in 1966/67. leased to Laker

T LIST AND DETAILS

Airways, then sub-leased as OD-AFA to MEA for 12-month period from 1 January 1968. Sold to BCAl on 1 February 1969 as G-ARTA. W/O January 1972.

NIGERIA AIRWAYS 5N-ABD, previously G-ARVA c/n 804. First fligh 8 November 1962. First to BOAC, then leased to Nlgerra Airways. Sold to Nigeria Airways 29 June 1966. Wrrtten off on approach to lagos 20 November 1969.

October 1967. C 1 Alb r1 XV 106 c/n 836fType 110 November 1967 C.l Tho VC XV 107 c/n 837fType 11 March 1968. C.1 James NI XV 108 c/n 838fType 1106 Ir 1968. C.l. William Rhod M I XV 109 c/n 839fType 110 Fir 1 II 1968. C.l. Arthur Scarf VC Note: all VC10s Cls convert d 1 C 1K passenger/cargo/tank r p 1996.

ROYAL AIR FORCE XR 806 c/n 830fType 1106. First flight 26 November 1965. C.l. George Thompson VC XR 807 c/n 827fType 1106. First flight 25 March 1966. C.l. Donald Garland VCfThomas Gray VC. XR 808 c/n 828fType 1106. First flight 9 June 1966. C 1. Kenneth Campbell VC XR 809 c/n 829fType 1106. First flight 28 July 1966. C 1. Hugh Malcolm VC Became G-AXlR RB211 testbed. Scrapped Kemble, Glos. XR 810 c/n 830fType 1106. First flight 29 November 1966. C 1. David lord VC XV 101 c/n 831fType 1106. First flight 11 January 1967. C.l. Lanoe Hawker VC. XV 102 c/n 832fType 1106. First flight 5 May 1967. Cl. Guy Gibson VC. XV 103 c/n 833fType 1106. First flight 14 June 1967. C 1. Edward Mannock VC. XV 104 c/n 834fType 1106. First flight 14 July 1967. C 1. James McCudden VC. XV 105 c/n 835fType 1106. First flight 3

GHANA AIRWAYS 9G -ABO C/N 823. First flight 14 November 1964. Ghana Airways. Withdrawn 1980. Broken up at Prestwick 1984. 9G-ABP C/N 824. First flight 21 May 1965. Ghana Airways. leased to MEA 1967. Destroyed in military action on ground Beirut Airport 1968.

769

Tanker Conversions

Type 1164 K.3 ZA 147 K.3 ex-EAAC ZA 148 K.3 ex-EAAC ZA 149 K.3 ex-EAAC ZA 150 K.3 ex-EAAC

5H-MMT 5Y-ADA 5X-UVJ 5H-MOG

Type 1112 K.2 ZA 140 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-Vl - ex BOAC ZAID 141 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VG - ex-BOAC ZAID 142 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VI - ex-BOAC ZAID 143 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VK - ex-BOAC ZAID 144 K.2 ex-Gulf Air A40-VC - ex-BOAC Type 1170 KA ZD 240 KA ex-BOAC ZD 241 KA ex-BOAC ZD 242 K.4 ex-BOAC ZD 230 KA ex-BOAC ZD 235 KA ex-BOAC

G-ASGl G-ASGM G-ASGP G-ASGA G-ASGG

Bibliography The following have been used as references: BOAC VCIO Pilot's Manual Davis, Peter J, East African: An Airline Story (Runnymede Malthouse Publishing) Flight Intemational magazine (March 1964/ May 1967)

Gunn, John, High Conidors - Qanta5 1955-1970 ( QP & Qantas) Hedley, Martin, VCIO (Ian Allan Publishing) Myrha, David, Secret ircraft: Designs of the Third Reich (Schiffer) Of Comets & Queens (Airlife Publishing Ltd) Putnam Aeronautical Reviews Issues 1 &

Ole: Some of the events related to the author by interviewees for this book have also been described to others who have written about the VC 10.

Index 2, Dr Barfield & R.A.R Wil on (Conway Maritime Press) Technical papers of Dr Barfield, A. Kitchenside, K. Lawson Trubshaw, Brian, Test Pilot (Sutton Publi hing) Vickers/BAC/B E PR department brochures and articles

Abell, C 44 Abingdon 159 Ackery, 0 43 aerodynamics 67 Aerolinas rgentinas 104 Ainscrow, Captain 137 Ainsworth, Captain 137 Airhus 9 A340 13,47 A3XX 99 Aircraft Furnishing Company 63 airframe, maintenance 147 Aitchison, Captain 137 A\cock & Brown 23 Amery, J 24, 25 APO bureau 29, 44, I, -92 Armstrong- Whitworth Argonaut I 5 A 'hman, 0 44 Autoland I, 90 Avro Canada Jet 67 Ayle bury, G 43 BAC/Aerospatiale Concorde 6, I], 106 Back, R 43 Baker, P 43 Barfield, N 4, 21, 24 'beaver tail' 70 Bell X I 67 Bluebooks 14-18 BOAC 18, 112-123 Boeing 4 707 6, II, 13, 21, 26, 27,40,45, 54, 117 708 10, I I, 14 727 67-6 Bomber Command III Borer, ' pud' 43 Brand, T 4, I I Brewer,Captain 137 Bristol Britannia 20, 26 Bristol iddeley Artouste 97 Bri tow, 44, II British Air Board 23 British Aircraft Corporation 27 One-Eleven 69 T R 2 26 British Airways 9, 112-124 British European Airways 34, 35, 36

770

British United Airways 10,77, 125, 126, 127, 12 , 129 Brize orton 14 , 156-157 Brokenshire, M 148 Brumby, Captain 137 Bryce, 'Jock' 4, 73, 74 Butler, C 64 Cairns, B 72 Caledonian 125-129 Canadian Pacific Airlines 106 Cane, A P W 69, 72 cargo door 5 75 Cartwright, Captain 137, 139 Can'air 104 'Caterpillar Club' 74 Central African Airways 142 Challenger 23 Chapman, W 43 Coastal Command I I I Cochrane, J 43 combi version 0 com posite construction rudder 77 Convair 0/990 67 Cossor 73 C A 104 Cunard 117 Dailey, J 37 Dassault Fa\con 50 38 Davies, J 43 Davis, J 44 Day, R 64 De Havilland Comet 16,17,1 ,2 ,35, 106, 112 deep stall 67 D'Erianger, ir G 24 developments 2-105 Diss, P 43 ditching 63 Dowty 66 drag problem 74 Drummond, Captain 137 Dutch roll 67, Dyke Acland, P 23 Dykes, Chief Engineer 17 East African Airways 9, 136-142 Edwards,SirG 14,17,18,24,26,27, 28 73

777

Engl i,h Steel 49 Elliotts 73 Elrar 62 Farnborough 67 Ferranti 66, 73 Field, H 44 Filron 54, 141 Findlay, D 43 Finnimore, J 44 Flanders 23 Fletcher, W 115 flying the VCIO I 5-111 Fokker 54 Freighter VC I 94, 99-1 3 Fundirika, Chief 137-140 Ghana Airways 129-134 Glenn 37 Goodall, M 4 Gray, Captain 45 Gulf Air 144 Guthrie, ir Giles 24, 25, 27 Haines, B 70 Halliday, J 116 Hamble III Handley Page Hermes lOS Handley Page Victor 67 Hartley, Captain 137 Hawker Siddeley Trident 19, 28, 38, 104 Hay, J 43 Hayley-Bell, D 43 Hemsley, H 43 Hill, Captain 137 Hitch, G 43 Hobson Ltd 67, 73 Holland, R 72 Holler, W 64 Howell:, G 43 Howley, D 43 Hoyland, P 115 Hughes, H 45 Hurn 53, 54 Hyrat 62 1I1ife, aptain 137, 139 lIyusbin 11-62 58, 59, 71 Imison, aptain 137 incidents lSI

INDEX

INDEX

interior 62-64 Ireland, Innes 107 ltala 23 Jackson, Captain 17 Jackson (E ) 137 J L 94 Jame~, D 43 Jehu, C 43 Jenkim, R 32 Kano 8, 114 Keating, P 4 Keenan, K 43 Khartoum 121 Kidlington III Kitchenside, A 4, 77 KLM 80 Knight, A 23 Knight, G 95 Kuchemann tips 69 Laker, ir F 4, 75, 125-12 Lambert 37 Lancastrian I 5 Laver~, Captain 137,139 Lawson, K 4, 67, 69 Lennig Chemicals 46 Leslie, Captain 137 Lockheed Constellation 2, 5 Electra 37 LIOII 3 LOT 104 Lufthansa 94 Mackenzie, P 45 Macnamara, E 43 Malawi Air 142-144 Mallinson Ltd 49 Marshall, E I , 31, 33, 44 McDonald 23 McDonnell Douglas 9

D '- 3 I 5 DC-7 2 DC- II, 21, 4 , 45 DC-96 DC-IO 35,3 McElhinney, D 43 Meadley, Captain 137 MidJIe East Airlines 145, 146 MiG-IS 67 ~inistry of upply 17 Misrair I 4 Mitchell, G 45, 137 Mole, R 43 Muir, I 72 Mullen, C 72 Muller, M 23 Multhopp, H 67

Multi-Role VCI 15 Murray, Captain 137 National Phy~ical Laboratory 7 icholl, J 44 igeria Airways 134-136 ormalair 66 Orde, Campbell 14 Pan American Airways 93, 94, 95 Patterson, A 43 peaky wing theory 71 Pearcy, H 70 Petty, T 4 Phillips, Captain 45 Pierson, R 23 Pluna 104 Porter 73 Prest\\'ick I 10 prototype G-ARTA 52 protoype & fI igh t testi ng 73 Qantas 26, 94 Qatar, Ruler of 145 Radford, R 43 Ratcliffe, Captain 137 Ratcliffe, J 4, 43 Raven, M 43 Redman, C 43 Rendall, Captain 75 Reykjavik II I Richardson, W 45 Rickettes, Captain 137 Roberts, L 44 Robinson, W 45 Rolls- Royce Avon 33, 35 RB211 10, 70, 77 Conway 10, 15, 17, 55, 62, 107-12 Olympus 15 Tay 31 Romeril, J 44 Royal Air Force VCI s 77, 154-166 Royal Aircraft Establ ishment 70 AAB 67 aunJers Roe LtJ 9, 26, 65 cars, G 44 edJon airflow step 69 en'ice Bulletins 14 Shannon II hort Hau I VC I0 96-99 idebotham, J 45 Skinner, 0 I 16 Skydrol 65 SI
772

Small piece, ir B 24, 26 mart, B 139 mith, 0 4 miths Ltd 73 tevenson, B 43 toney, T 45, 75, II traight, W 14 tratocruiser 105 SuJ Aviation 55 Caravelle 9,67 Sultan of Oman 145 ummers, M 73 Super V 10 7 , 79,80, uper 212 78 Superb 78,87,88,89,91 Super 200 90, 92 LR I & LR 2 87, 90 Supermarine 23 Swanson, J 44 Systems 65

Viscount I ,2 ,31,32,33, 34, 35 Wellington I , 27 VIP Flight 145 Vogel, H 43 Wallis, B I , 27 Wal h, 44 Walton, F 44 WarJ Brook LtJ 73 WarJ, F 44

Watkinson, H 24 Weber, Dr 7 Welton, H 49 West African Ainv
Tank K 67 tanker conversions K2-K4 154-166 Tanker Programme 15 -166 Thomas, ir M 24 Thorneycroft, P 26 TodJ, 45 TownsenJ, B 45 To\\'nsenJ, W 45 TPI 106, 107 training 110 Trans Australia Airlines 37 Trans <maJa Airlines 37 Trubshaw, B 69, 72, 73 Turner, G 43 Tuttle, Air Commodore 14 Tyrer, H 43 unJerfloor lounge 103 niteJ rab Emirates 145 Varnair 104 vibration meters I 6 Vickers-Armstrongs LtJ Boxkite I) FBI4 I Gunbus I 113 67 Three-Eleven 99 VI 0 / VC7 I ,13,14,15,16,17, I " 25, 26, 37 Valiant 13, 14, 15, 16, 2 , 32, 35, 74 Vanguard I ,31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 74 Vanjet 19,2930,35,3,41,67,6 VCII 97 Vernon 24 Vespa 24 Victoria 24 Viking 18, 23 Vimy 23, 27

773

ISBN 1-86126-231-0

9 781861 262318

>