Vickers Vanguard

Geoff, e-mail, 26.08.2009 05:58 What a fantastic aircraft. As a kid I flew on it many times on the London-Belfast route. This included both Nutts Corner and Aldergrove airports in NI. Most of the flights were late at night (off peak and cheap I guess). I was mesmorised by the start up and mesmorised by the sound of those RR Tyne turboprops. The large oval windows were brilliant. The best airliner ever! reply

Mike Nicholls, e-mail, 04.08.2009 16:20 My very first flight ever was at the age of 13, I flew from Heathrow to Gibraltar in July 1965. My main memories of the flight were flying over spain watching its shadow pass over the countryside, of the landing into Gibraltar over the beach ( r /w 27 )and of the ensuing temporary deafness in my ears - and, least I forget, my first glass of coke! reply

mike green, 22.07.2009 09:33 Without doubt the "Vanguard" was one of the handsomest airplanes ever to fly. I would plan my flights around the schedules of the Vanguard just to avoid the noisier Viscount. I think, even now in my latter years, a better looking aircraft has never flown (with a nod of course to the Lockheed Constellaton.) reply

mike green, 21.07.2009 21:42 Without doubt the "Vanguard" was one of the handsomest airplanes ever to fly. I would plan my flights around the schedules of the Vanguard just to avoid the noisier Viscount. I think, even now in my latter years, a better looking aircraft has never flown (with a nod of course to the Lockheed Constellaton.) reply

Robert Allen, e-mail, 02.04.2009 15:27 Verdun - I have only just come back to this MB and am fascinated at your experience in handling the Vanguard. I am also surprised that such a large aircraft offered no power assistance to the pilot! I know a few take offs in which I was a passenger were made 'on the roll' and perhaps this was due to the practice being less muscularly demanding on the pilot. I also understand that propeller pitch was an infinitely variable option i.e. no click stops, so how did you determine actual blade angle for any given mode of flight? Were the pitch controls located on the throttle pedestal? reply

Ian Cartledge, e-mail, 16.03.2009 23:04 I remember flying from Heathrow to Gibralter on the Vangaurd when I was young and about 1 /3 way through the flight the Captain announced that he had to switch an engine off, which I was sitting next to, and so I then watched it free-spinning in the wind throughout the whole flight. We still carried on our flight to Gibralter with no panic or worry, the Captain just announced that we would be delayed slightly. What a great plane! reply

Chris, e-mail, 18.02.2009 03:24 I flew to Bermuda with Air Canada in 1968 from Montreal in a Vangard aircraft, and as we descended for landing, the cabin filled with exhaust, and the stewardesses ran to the back in a panic, one saying to the other "they can't ee out of the cockpit window" - something that was not guaranteed to instill confidence over the deep ocean below us! We dropped sharply, landed safely, but we reeked of fuel and never really knew what had happened. A friend in this plane, who was to fly on to Barbados in the same aircraft told me that they subsituted another Vanguard for the second leg, and they had exactly the same situation upon landing. Can anyone explain what was happening there, and if it was a particular problem with this aircraft? Many thanks. reply

s.debattista, e-mail, 28.12.2008 14:01 I remember flying on this aircraft to malta in the early 60's as a child. Although it seemed to take much longer to fly this route than the present airbus, the vanguard with its roomy cabin, large oval windows and lower flying ceiling was a was a much more pleasent flying experience...or is my view coloured by nostalgia ??? reply

SpartanCanuck, e-mail, 23.10.2008 08:36 When dismissing the capabilities of the turboprop, A319 vs Vanguard isn't exactly a fair comparison. Modern materials science and engineering vs 1960 is NATURALLY going to make the A319 the winner. W F Wendt has a point. Perhaps it wasn't the case a year ago, but thanks to the high price of fuel, turboprops ARE making something of a comeback as I type this. I point to increased sales of the ATR-72 and the DHC-8 /Q400 as of late in the regional feedliner market. Horizon Air has had such good results using the Q400 on traditionally jet runs that they will actually converted all of their standing CRJ orders to Q400's, and will be going to an all Q400 fleet. Now, I'm sure the A319 handily blows the Q400 away on the long haul, but with the Q400's speed, rate of climb, and lower ideal cruising altitude, a jet isn't going to have any appreciable performance advantage at ranges less than 400 miles. Horizon will actually be using it for runs somewhat longer than that. Meanwhile, depending upon airfare and seating configuration (and the price of JP4 this week), the Q400 is also able to turn a profit with load factors of somewhere around 50%, which is pretty nice compared to the competing 70-80 passenger RJ's. Admittedly, it remains to be seen wether such an advantage would scale well to the 120 passenger narrow-body range of the market. I don't personally figure we'll be seeing the likes of the Vanguard and the Britannia rising from the ashes anytime soon. reply

johann gudjonsson, e-mail, 02.10.2008 15:01 This was a VERY FINE A /C,but,late and overtaken by general aviation events;possibly by being built TOO closely to just one airlines(BEA's)specificaton. However ,this talk of Airbus Ind.products being better /superior is,candidly,arrant drivel ! All airbus products,but dint of the FBW flight priciple are DEATH TRAPS.Besides which,Airbus is,simply,Sud Aviation "in drag" reply

Verdun Luck, e-mail, 17.07.2008 22:34 Robert Allen is perfectly right, the Vanguard did make a splendid noise, but then all 4 engined propeller aircraft do (I flew the DHC-7 as well. However, he is wrong to think that the Vanguard was undemanding to fly. It was a big aeroplane that flew at 350 knots TAS, but all of the flying controls were manually operated with no power assistance. Added to this was a massive yaw induced every time the thrust was altered (courtesy of 4 huge props all turning the same way (it flew completely straight if you shut down and feathered the No. 2 Engine). No, it required a lot of physical strength to fly a Vanguard plus a lot of action on the trim wheels in all axis. Syncing up 4 props every time you moved the throttles took a fair amount of effort as well. The Vanguard was certainly fun, but give me an A319 to work in any (every) day. reply

Robert Allen, e-mail, 14.07.2008 10:44 Verdun-few aircraft exhibited the magical sound of the Vanguard with its Tyne engines. I used to sit at work hearing the aircraft go over at about 3000ft on a nearby approach to Heathrow. It was a beautiful and elegant aircraft in its practical simplicity. I imagine it was an undemanding aircraft to handle (if only because of the straight wing layout). I am told that pilots love some aircraft and hate others. I hope the Vanguard belonged to the former category! Bws. reply

peter norton, e-mail, 18.06.2008 20:23 Like Verdun Luck I too was involved with the Vanguard /Merchantman in the 70 and 80's - but I 'fixed' them. Like Verdun, I too was involved in the A320, but in its early days at BA. I remember the ferry trips in the late 70's to bring two Vanguards back from Indonesia for overhaul at Heathrow - neither trip was 'uneventful' with various important items leaking or just dropping off en route. It did vibrate a bit... reply

Ian Young, e-mail, 06.05.2008 14:28 My first flight in 1964 was in a Vanguard from Edinburgh to Heathrow. I remember the large oval windows and the noise of the engines and I was lucky to be travelling First Class which was a small cabin behind the rear door. We were served a full lunch with champagne or wine poured from wine baskets. reply

Dave Kidney, e-mail, 23.04.2008 19:39 I recall seeing this aircraft as a young bo in thw 1960s at Piarco International Airport in Trinidad wearing the colours of Trans Canada and wondering at what a splenidid plane it was. I knew of the Viscount's comfort and I can only imagine how comfortable the hugh Vanguard may have been. Where are all the nice planes gone? reply

Verdun Luck, e-mail, 17.03.2008 02:07 Perhaps I can try to answer W F Wendt's question "Is it time to bring back the turboprop?" I flew the Vickers Vanguard in the 1980s. It was a 4 engine turboprop that carried just under 150 passengers and had a maximum take off weight of 64 tonnes. I now fly the Airbus A319 which carries just over 150 passengers and has a maximum take off weight of 64 tonnes. The Airbus cruises about 25% faster and uses considerably less fuel. The take off and approach speeds on both aircraft were about the same resulting in very similar runway length requirements. Esentially the problem with big turboprops is that in addition to a turbine engine it also requires a very complex and difficult to manifacture reduction gear and propeller system. To get an aircraft to perfom from short runways you need a big wing which will work well at low speeds; the same big wing will result in a low criuseing speed. The type of powerplant will not make much difference. The World has found that it is cheaper and better to build a longer runway than to use inefficient aircraft. The Vanguard was a very fine aircraft and the RR Tyne was an outstanding engine for its time. Thirty years later the A319 is better in almost every way. reply

Eveline Tscharntke, e-mail, 01.02.2008 23:59 I remember very well my first flight from BER(THF) via MUC to KLU(Klagenfurt /Austria)operated by BEA (British European Airways) in July, 1967. This was the beginning of an "ever lasting love" for civil aviation. The first section of this flight (BER /THF-MUC)was operated by the legandary VISCOUNT 814, and the second section (MUC-KLU) by an "huge aircraft" named VANGUARD, the biggest aircraft I ever saw at these times. And I remember the very big oval windows of the Viscount, the biggests windows I ever saw during many flights on several types of airplanes. reply

Herbert C. Schneider, e-mail, 23.11.2007 21:56 The Vickers section does not discuss the VC-10 four-engine jet airliner, which entered commercial service in 1964. The VC-10 was a fine airplane, but, like many other British airliners, entered service too late to be a viable competitor in its class. reply

1-20 21-40 41-60