Vickers Victoria

Vickers Victoria

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Vickers Victoria

The Vickers Victoria was a troop transport developed alongside the Vickers Virginia bomber, and which shared many design elements with that aircraft. Vickers was first asked to submit a design for a troop transport on 8 June 1920. The new aircraft was to be able to carry 25 fully equipped troops for 400 miles, had to be able to operate from rough ground, and because of the small size of many hangers had to have folding wings.

The first prototype of the Victoria shared the same wings and engine housing as the Virginia I when first built. The fuselage was completely new. The troops were housed in an enclosed cabin inside the fuselage, while the pilot’s open cockpit was built into the top of the rounded nose.

Victoria III

By the time the Victoria entered production the Virginia had reached the Mk VII. The production Victoria IIIs adopted the swept back wings of the Virginia VII, as well as the more streamlined engine cowling used since the Virginia II. The first Mk III made its maiden flight in January 1926, and the aircraft entered service in the same year with No.70 Squadron at Hinaidi and No.216 Squadron at Heliopolis. A total of 46 Victoria IIIs were built.

The new Vickers transport was most famous for its role in the evacuation of 586 women and children from the British legation in Kabul between 23 December 1928 and 25 February 1929, during the Shiamwari uprising against King Amanullah.

Victoria IV

The Victoria IV replaced the wooden framework of the Mk III with an all-metal framework, and was developed alongside the all-metal Virginia X. The first all-metal Victoria was built over the winter of 1927-28, and was powered by Bristol Jupiter engines. At least thirteen of the existing Victoria IIIs were then upgraded with all-metal wings, although they retained the Napier Lion engines.

Victoria V

The Victoria V was built around a completely metal framework, and was powered by two Lion XI engines. As with the Victoria III, they matched the transport fuselage of the Victoria with the wings and tail of the then-current Virginia X. A total of 37 Mk Vs were built between 1929 and 1933.

Victoria VI

The Victoria IV was developed at the same time as the Valentia Mk I. Both aircraft were powered by two Bristol Pegasus engines, which improved the performance of the aircraft at an all-up weight of 18,000lb. It was possible to further this weight to 19,500lb if the fuselage was strengthened. Those aircraft that were given the stronger fuselage were renamed as the Vickers Valentia, while those aircraft that were given the new engines but not the stronger fuselage were designated as the Victoria VI. As 54 of the 83 Victoria IIIs and Vs were converted into Valentias, under thirty Victoria VIs can have been produced.

Victoria V

Victoria VI


Napier Lion XIB

Bristol Pegasus IIL3


570hp each

660hp each


2 plus 23 fully equipped troops

Wing span

87ft 4in


59ft 6in


17ft 9in

Empty Weight



Gross Weight



Maximum speed

110mph at sea level

130mph at 5,000ft


770 miles

800 miles


The Port of Victoria (POV) was created to formally organize the management of the ports and waterways of the Victoria County Navigation District, which encompasses the entire county of Victoria. The creation of Navigation districts are enabled with the powers to enhance the navigable waterways within their jurisdiction and their creation is allowed by the Texas Water Code.

The Port has recently formed an Industrial Park with multi-modal access. The Park is located within a Foreign Trade Zone and a Texas Enterprise Zone. The Port has the ability to “build to suit” and tailor a package specific to customer facility and transportation needs.

A major cost savings was realized by including the basin expansion with the completion of the widening and deepening of the Canal. In addition to almost doubling the size of the harbor, a 400 foot x 150-foot barge slip was added. These enhancements will offer our customers greater safety and efficiency.

Formation of the Interstate Inland Waterway League of Louisiana and the Texas Canal Association. Construction of Gulf Intracoastal Waterway begins.

U. S. Congress passes a bill authorizing a special survey for the canal. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers recommends the canal be constructed between New Orleans and Corpus Christi.

First portion of the GIWW is complete – between Sabine River and New Orleans , LA.

The history of Buckingham Palace

Buckingham Palace presents an inscrutable facade. It possesses a composite aura of authority, much as the White House does in America. The edifice has come to embody the voice of royalty statements issued to the world from behind these walls begin with the words 'Buckingham Palace announced today. . . .'

In addition to its role as a palace and Queen Elizabeth II's official London home, it also serves as the Sovereign's office, where she entertains Heads of State, receives citizens, and holds investitures. During the present reign, Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton have been entertained here, and the Duchess of Windsor stayed for several days following the Duke's death in 1972.

Henry VIII first chose this part of London as the home of royalty when he settled in Cardinal Wolsey's Palace, Whitehall. Later, he moved to the present St. James's Palace and drained the marshy land to the south, creating St. James's Park. From the River Tyburn that ran through Green Park, he created the lakes that now adorn the grounds of Buckingham Palace and St. James's Park. It is remarkable, centuries later, to find these 40 acres of still-undeveloped land in the centre of a thriving city.

Lord Goring of Hurstpierpoint built a house, the forerunner to the present palace, in about 1640. It passed through various hands before coming into the possession of the Duke of Buckingham, a suitor of Queen Anne. Here, he built Buckingham House in 1703, generally deemed the finest house in London, with the mall stretching before it through St. James's Park. After his death in 1731, George II approached the Duke's widow with an offer to buy it, but it was George III who finally closed the deal in 1762, paying £28,000. The King, one of the greatest book collectors in the history of England, created a fine library in the house.

In 1775, George gave Buckingham House to Queen Charlotte and thereafter it became known as 'The Queen's House'. George III spent his twilight years at Windsor Castle, suffering from the well-known effects of his porphyria.

George IV contributed greatly to London's architectural and cultural glory, and like so many enterprising Kings in whose legacy we now rejoice, his contemporaries deemed him profligate and a worry to the Exchequer. He employed the architect John Nash to repair and improve the house, which became Buckingham Palace in 1825. His additions included the Marble Arch, built as the ceremonial entrance to the Palace, which has since been moved to its present site at the northern end of Park Lane. George IV collected many of the finest treasures in the Palace, notably the fabulous Table of the Grand Commanders, commissioned by Napoleon and made of a single piece of Sèvres porcelain, inlaid with portraits of Alexander the Great and others.

Sir John Soane also submitted plans for remodelling Buckingham House. Sir John would have given Londoners a version of the Palace of Versailles, with great arches, columns, plinths, and inner courtyards. Instead, the Palace evolved gradually, first as an eastern facade with south and north wings, and then later with a westerly facade constructed (not very satisfactorily) in the reign of Queen Victoria. Neither George IV nor William IV ever lived in the new palace William IV took possession on 5th May 1837, only a few weeks before he died. Queen Victoria was the first monarch actually to live there as Queen.

Queen Victoria revelled in her new home, moving there from Kensington Palace. She hosted balls and receptions and from Buckingham Palace, she progressed to Westminster Abbey for her Coronation in 1838. After she married Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg in 1840, she lived there with her expanding family until the Prince Consort's death in 1861. Thereafter the place entered a state of decline and for some years looked increasingly derelict and in need of repair.

Only in the latter part of her reign did Queen Victoria make occasional appearances at the Palace, notably for her two Jubilees in 1887 and 1897. Princess Alice (Countess of Athlone) appeared on the balcony both in 1887 for Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee and again in 1977 for the present Queen's Silver Jubilee. Alice, Queen Victoria's granddaughter, was too young to take part in the 1887 procession, but not too old to do so in 1977.

During Victoria's absence, the Palace sometimes housed foreign dignitaries. In 1873, Nassered-Din, Shah of Persia, stayed there. His Imperial Majesty had unconventional personal habits: eschewing the dining-room table, he ate roast lamb straight from the floor and he once organized a boxing match in the Palace gardens. It is even said that the bones of one of his staff, executed with a bowstring, lie beneath the immaculate lawn.

During Edward VII's reign, the Palace provided the setting for great balls and evening courts, though the King called it 'the Sepulchre.' Sir Compton Mackenzie noted: 'It was not until April 1902 that the Palace was ready for the residence of the King and Queen and even now we may reflect with awe on the perfume of that first cigar lighted in what had been Queen Victoria's private apartments'.

George V and Queen Mary made it very much their home, adding a new domestic touch. The First World War overshadowed the early years of their reign, but later Queen Mary, one of the Palace's great benefactors, undertook a considerable reorganization of the pictures and collections of china, reuniting separated pieces and making the Picture Gallery less crowded and easier to enjoy. George V spent many happy hours in the Stamp Room, and by 1936, the King had amassed a collection of 250,000 stamps in 325 large volumes.

Not all monarchs felt such affection for Buckingham Palace. Edward VIII hated the place and spent only a few nights there during his short reign. Nor was each stay without incident. George VI made it his headquarters during the Second World War, and it suffered bomb damage on more than one occasion. At the end of the War, the Palace played a part in the Nation's grateful celebrations, when, symbolically, the Royal Family gathered together on the balcony with Winston Churchill, the Prime Minister who had led the Nation during this traumatic period in history.

Since 1952 Buckingham Palace has been The Queen's working home. Visitors once could enter the Palace only by invitation, but this has changed somewhat during the present reign. The Royal Mews in Buckingham Palace Road opens its doors to visitors, who can see The Queen's carriages, horses, and the stables and Riding School, which are an essential part of daily life for this department of the Royal Household. The Queen's Gallery (on the site of a chapel destroyed by German bombs) opened in 1962 and has exhibited a succession of treasures from the Royal Collection.

The Queen also opened the State Rooms to visitors in the summer of 1993. In November of the previous year, fire badly damaged Windsor Castle, and though The Queen bore no official responsibility to pay for the repairs, she decided that one Royal residence should come to the assistance of another. Each summer when the Royal Family is at Balmoral, Buckingham Palace admits the public in an effort to raise 70 per cent of the money needed to repair the castle.

Visitors see the State Rooms where the Royal Family gathered for state banquets and family christenings the settings for some of Cecil Beaton's fine portraits of The Queen, The Queen Mother, and Princess Margaret and the Palace's extensive lawns, so reminiscent of the evening when, in 1762, Queen Charlotte had the entire grounds lit by thousands of coloured lamps and led King George III to the window to enjoy the full glory of his new home.

The Palace remains a private home to the Royal Family, but it is also a national treasure, a potent symbol to the British people of their own strength, continuity, and tradition. It is a highly visible part of British heritage just as the White House is a vital part of America's historic fabric. It was no accident that the Palace became a target for German bombs if it had been destroyed, the Nation would have been dealt a heavy moral blow. Fortunately for us, it survived to open its doors on another era.

Indigenous languages hold wisdom and a pathway for wholeness and spiritual balance. As an Indigenous university graduate, I acknowledge that I was conditioned to beliefs, values, and principles of Government and academic systems, and that these systems have and continue to have a history of neglect and abuse toward Indigenous Canadians. Ancestral law, principles, protocol, and process through the Potlatch and Indigenous cleansing ceremonies have awakened me – to the transformative wisdom, beauty, and freedom that exists in Indigenous ways of being and that are outside the cycle of oppression.

Ancestral principles and teachings are the foundation for healing. Within ancestral ways of being is an interconnectedness with the energy of the supernatural that has sustained, and will continue to sustain and nurture the seeker.

Ancestral ways of being are not limited by time or space. Mental health services and psychological methods and theories are helpful, but alone, they do not have the power or authority to usher the seeker to transformational healing.

Working toward spiritual balance with individuals or the collective, I believe the answers are within the seeker(s). My compassionate approach combines methods and skills gleaned from counselling methods and ceremonial ways that honour the pathway within the seeker.

Trainings and Workshops

The principles and values that form the living foundation of all trainings and workshops are rooted in cleansing ceremonies and rituals. These include the Holy Eucharist, Sweat and Fasting Lodge Ceremonies, Making-It-Right Potlatch, Restorative Justice Circles, and Conflict Resolution practices.


The history of settlement by Coast Salish (Salishan) First Nations (Native American) people in the Victoria region dates back well over 10,000 years. The site of the future city was known to the Coast Salish as Camosun or Camosack. In 1778 explorer Capt. James Cook reached the island. English navigator George Vancouver was with Cook on that voyage and returned in 1792 to circumnavigate and survey the island, which was later named for him. As fur trading became established in the region, the Hudson’s Bay Company came to dominate the island and in 1843 established Fort Camosun—later called Fort Albert and then Fort Victoria, for the British queen—at the city’s present site.

In 1849 Vancouver Island became a British crown colony with Fort Victoria as its capital. More settlers arrived, and a small village arose near the fort. By the early 1850s the village site had been formally surveyed, and in 1852 the settlement was named Victoria. Agriculture, forestry, and coal interests were by then replacing those of fur, but there were never more than several hundred residents until the discovery of gold in 1858 along the banks of the Fraser River and later in the interior Cariboo region, both in mainland British Columbia. The region, including Victoria, was transformed instantly by an influx of some 25,000–30,000 gold seekers (many of them American and Chinese), most of whom used Victoria as the port of entry to the mainland and as the supply centre for their mining ventures. (In 1858 British Columbia also was made a crown colony.)

Gold fever was thus responsible for Victoria’s rapid growth from a few hundred to several thousand inhabitants. It was incorporated as a city in 1862. In 1865 the Royal Navy designated an existing naval base at Esquimalt (now a suburb of Victoria), on the west side of the harbour, as its Pacific headquarters, further spurring population growth in the region. During this period Victoria became the most important city in Canada’s western region. It was made the capital of the combined colonies of Vancouver Island and British Columbia in 1866, and by 1871 the city of Victoria’s population was 3,630. The city’s protected harbour facilitated import and export services for the whole colony, and agriculture, forestry, and fishing provided additional employment. Victoria became the colony’s financial centre and a focus of industry, with a flour mill, soap works, gasworks, tanneries, shipyards, and brickyards, as well as baking, brewing, and distilling plants.

The arrival in 1886 of the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) at Burrard Inlet, near Vancouver, made that city an international port connected to the rest of North America by rail. As a result, Victoria’s commercial activities and population soon took a backseat to booming Vancouver, although Victoria and its surrounding region experienced steady growth.

Is Social Media Good for History?

Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms are widely used by historians. But does anyone benefit?

‘Social media favours the quirky, the visual, the gruesome’

Catherine Fletcher, Professor of History, Manchester Metropolitan University and author of The Beauty and the Terror: An Alternative History of the Italian Renaissance (Bodley Head, 2020)

At its best, social media is a remarkable mechanism for exchanging ideas, book recommendations and contacts, all of which makes the life of the historian a great deal easier. Last year, I was part of a conference round table featuring research on Manchuria, Korea, Russia and Italy, which wouldn’t have happened without Twitter. Archive work can be isolating and social media can be an excellent virtual water-cooler, a place to swap jokes and amusing tales, such as the mystery of the shrinking crocodile that occupied me and my followers while I was working on the Medici wardrobe records. (Both large and small crocodiles were among the curiosities collected by the 16th-century dukes of Florence.)

The crocodile story is instructive, however, because I wasn’t in Florence to research deceased reptiles. My project was on guns, which are a much more sensitive topic on social media. It would be all too easy for a witty comment about historical firearms to lose its humour amid breaking news of a shooting, which is why I’m pretty cautious when it comes to tweeting about them. Social media is spectacularly bad at nuance: the subtlety that is a mark of good historical writing rarely plays well amid the clamour. Stuffed crocodiles seem somewhat safer.

Yet even crocodiles aren’t without their problems. They’re an example of the way social media favours the quirky, the visual, the gruesome, salacious or conspiratorial. There’s a certain tabloid headline quality to it all and, while that can be fun, it has real problems. In a Twitter thread last June, curator Sara Huws wrote of her concern that the histories she tweeted from a Welsh museum account got more attention if she implied they’d been suppressed. The public wanted to believe in a conspiracy to hide the historical truth, even when there was no evidence of such a thing. Huws stopped using the tactic. Yet under pressure to promote an exciting piece of research, it can be all too easy for historians – even those with the best of motivations – to buy into social media’s more worrying tendencies.

‘The disorders of social media can also be the liberty of alternative interpretations’

Jeremy Black, Author of The Power of Knowledge: How Information and Technology Made the Modern World (Yale, 2015)

Nobody has ever owned opinion. Even in the most authoritarian states, there have been gossip and rumour both within and outside the system and, in many respects, social media is a set of means for the dissemination of both. The Internet has taken forward the capability offered by the telephone for instantaneous communication between spatially separate individuals. Thanks to such developments, established political, social, economic and cultural loyalties and alignments coexist with rapidly developing linkages. Patterns of control are challenged.

Linked to this, there is a host of intellectual and cultural concerns, from health panics to the fear that accuracy and authority in reporting have been corrupted. If opinion and feeling trump facts and thinking, what are the consequences?

For historians, they include access to a broad tranche of opinion as many societies experience a process of democratisation in which existing institutions were shaken. The Internet has offered a range and capacity different from those of previous national, transnational and global information and communications systems. It has also permitted a more engaged consumer response, wherein consumers become users and users become producers. Media content and software-based products provide platforms for user-driven interactions and content. The resulting idea of information and opinions as chaos and crisis all too often reflects the standard approach of ‘what I stand for is reasonable, but you are a victim of false consciousness and your approach is crude and populist’.

A more careful analysis of circumstances is needed. Established patterns of academic and other authority are not necessarily benign and, in much of the world, history is part of a state-driven process of legitimation and ideology. Even in liberal societies, there are heavily slanted processes of professional influence and argument, including access to grants and publication. The disorder of social media can also be the liberty of alternative interpretations.

‘It is hard to get a sense of what really lurks behind one’s online bubble’

Matt Shaw, Librarian at the Institute of Historical Research, University of London

History – or at least the engagement of historians – is undoubtedly good for social media. On Twitter, they make me laugh out loud daily, they urge caution when a historical image with a dicey provenance is going viral and they diligently puncture the myths, nostalgia and explanations that find such fertile, and sometimes dangerous, ground online. But when looking at social media it is difficult to get a sense of what really lurks beyond one’s online bubble, neatly curated as it is with a wide selection of coruscating Twitterstorians.

With a few exceptions, it is hard to see historians making any real dent on the broader culture through Twitter, let alone the giants of Instagram, WeChat or Facebook. This is not to say important discussions have not taken place, notably around Confederate Monuments in the US or the use of the term ‘Anglo-Saxon’, but they don’t register in the broader babble of bots, grams and stans. A more quantifiable contribution might be the opening up of historical collections to wider audiences.

But is social media good for historians? Here, I think, we are mostly looking at Twitter, which, like the discipline of history remains a largely textual medium, leavened with the occasional well-chosen gif. It is a gift to the historian’s tradecraft: the bread and butter of sharing references testing of thoughts raising profiles deciphering a tricky hand discovering fellow toilers in the same field. But there is an undoubted emotional, even psychological, cost that the medium exacts – one that is mostly not borne by those identifying as male, nor by those in positions of academic seniority or other privilege. The real boon it offers, if the cost to those raising critical, under-represented, or new voices can be overlooked, is the shaking off of old views of what history is and how it should be done.

Whether or not social media is good for us or not, it isn’t going away anytime soon. Nor is it going to stay still. Maybe social media will settle down as business pressures, regulation and shifting demographics reshape the online – and the real – world. For Gen Z, a Twitter thread is as likely to be as attractive as a recorder party at Professor Welch’s.

‘How can I fail to be stimulated by the ease of access to understanding that social media has brought?’

Llewelyn Morgan, Tutorial Fellow in Classics, Brasenose College, Oxford

A few years ago, British Pathé uploaded its entire collection of historic films to YouTube. The editing of each of the 85,000 items was pretty minimal, needless to say, and a lot of the material was issued with inaccurate descriptions attached. One such item was a minute-long news report, subtitled in German, on a revolution in Afghanistan in 1928-29. We see the rebel forces marching into Kabul, a close-up of their leader, Habibullah Kalakani, soon to be King Habibullah II but denigrated by his enemies as Bachaye Saqao, ‘Son of a Water carrier’. At the end we glimpse the British Vickers Victoria aircraft that spirited foreigners and members of the former royal family out of danger and over the mountains to India. Pathé claim it as a different event entirely, wrong date, wrong king.

It’s an amazing survival one of the things I’m most proud of having brought to greater attention, and that despite the scenes when I posted it on Twitter and made the mistake of referring to Habibullah as Bachaye Saqao. (What is safely history to me can retain an urgently contemporary charge in Afghanistan.) But it encapsulates, I’d like to suggest, social media’s impact on our discipline: a thrilling explosion of information, combined with the dramatic loss of authoritative framing that this democratisation of knowledge-gathering has brought. Dodgy versions of history thrive and go uncontested in this environment and it offends us deeply. But for all that, what a thing to see. What an exciting document for a historian to be able to share.

Fresh sources of information, not to mention fresh means to communicate information, can never be a bad thing for a historian. In my later middle age I can be reading about Anglo-Saxon saints one minute, cuneiform scribes, Subcontinental genetics or Edwardian architecture the next. How can I fail to be stimulated by the ease of access to understanding that social media has brought?

Yet am I grateful that I learnt to sift and evaluate evidence in the Dark Ages before the Internet came along? Yes, more than I can say.

Earnhardt-Vickers Confrontation (Dale Earnhardt Survives)

Vickers wrecks Johnson and Dale Jr. in one of the most controversial moves of the 2000's.

The Earnhardt-Vickers Confrontation was the last documented post-race altercation that Dale Earnhardt Sr. got in. During the 2006 UAW-Ford 500, Dale Earnhardt Sr. filled in for Dale Jr.'s regular spotter for this race, guiding his son around the track. The race restarted on lap 178, with Earnhardt Jr. leading Johnson and Vickers. That lap, Burton (in fifth) had a flat left rear tire and lost a lap. The field then formed a single line, with most remaining in that formation for the rest of the race. Dale Earnhardt Sr. kept instructing Jr. on the final laps, trying desperately to get his son the win, telling him to watch for when Johnson would make a move on the last lap. On the final lap, Johnson and Vickers left turn two with Johnson moving out of line to pass Earnhardt Jr.. Dale Earnhardt Sr. told Dale Jr. to get down and block quick, which he attempted to do, when Vickers tried to move out with Johnson to provide drafting assistance, he clipped Johnson's right rear quarter panel. Johnson clipped Earnhardt Jr.'s left rear corner panel sending both drivers into the infield. The yellow flag went out and the field was frozen in place, with the order of finish determined by where the drivers were when the caution began. This gave Vickers the victory (the first of his career), although he was booed by the crowd and ended up in a physical altercation with Dale Earnhardt Sr.

Vickers' celebrations before Hendrick arrived followed by a confrontation with Earnhardt Sr as celebrations concluded.

Earnhardt was very angry, adamant that Vickers had wrecked his son on purpose via Jimmie Johnson. Sr. reportedly walked into victory lane just as celebrations concluded, pushed Vickers to his car then lifted him up and told him not to do anything like that again, before winding up his fist but not punching. He then dropped the stunned Vickers and walked away with his normal Intimidator swagger. Earnhardt was fined $50,000 dollars for his actions. Vickers declined to comment on the situation.

The History of Season 3: Episode by Episode

The whirlwind third season of Victoria may have had its dramatic highs and lows, but what parts were really true? A cholera epidemic, riotous uprisings, political chess moves and marital tensions marked this season’s storylines, and much of it was on par with how things really happened in 19 th century England. Take a look through our roundup of each episode’s historical features to learn more about the real-life events that inspired the season. [Contains Season 3 spoilers.]

Ready to re-watch Victoria Season 3? Binge the entire season on PBS Passport, an added member benefit.

Episode 1: Uneasy Lies The Head That Wears The Crown

The palace doors swing open for some pivotal new arrivals: Victoria’s mysterious half-sister Princess Feodora, and the womanizing Foreign Secretary Lord Henry Palmerston, not to mention a king escaping political unrest. Find out the real story about these key characters in Victoria’s life, the backstory of brewing revolution in London, and more.

Episode 2: London Bridge Is Falling Down

With an outraged mob just outside the Palace gates and tensions running high, Victoria gives birth to Princess Louise, Albert fights to keep his family safe, and the Chartist movement gains momentum. Find out more about what the Chartists were fighting for and see period images of the growing royal family.

Episode 3: Et In Arcadia

Despite the idyllic surroundings, tempers flare at Osborne House when Victoria and Albert go head-to-head. Sparks of a different kind fly between Lord Palmerston and Duchess Sophie. A room mix-up nearly causes scandal, and the games between Lord Palmerston and Feodora began. Find out the truth behind that drink-throwing moment, and learn all about bathing machines and more.

Episode 4: Foreign Bodies

A cholera epidemic sweeps through the streets of London, leaving devastation in its wake, and a distraught Victoria searching for how to help. Skerrett and Francatelli make a bold move, but not everything goes according to plan. Learn more about Victoria’s real-life relationships with Dr. John Snow and Florence Nightingale, and about the devastating toll that cholera took on 19 th century London.

Episode 5: A Show of Unity

Following another assassination attempt, the royal family (finally) visits Ireland hoping to mend fences. The Palmerstons offer a warm welcome, but Albert has some confrontational questions for Lord Palmerston. See what Lady Palmerston really looked like, and learn more about Victoria’s relationship with Ireland with in Episode 5’s Fact or Fiction and History in Images features.

Episode 6: A Coburg Quartet

The birth of Prince Arthur (baby number seven!) calls for a Georgian-era themed christening ball, but scandal strikes involving private family drawings. Meanwhile, Victoria and Albert can’t quite see eye-to-eye on a new coin design, and tensions between Victoria and Feodora finally (and dramatically) came to a head. See images and learn more about the controversial coin, the family etchings, and the glamorous ball.

Episode 7: A Public Inconvenience

Albert has an inspired new plan, but not everyone is on board. Victoria, meanwhile, tries to make some sort of peace with Feodora, and Palmerston makes a questionable political move. Learn all about Albert’s vision for the Great Exhibition of 1851, Albert’s partner Henry Cole, and the international trouble that Palmerston faced.

Episode 8: The White Elephant

In the Season 3 finale, after many long, tireless nights and jam-packed days, Albert’s big day arrives at long last. Feodora shows her true colors, while Palmerston must face his new fate after political disaster. Learn all about the history behind the Crystal Palace, Heidi’s marital prospects, and more from the season finale.

By the end of Season 3, seven of Victoria and Albert’s nine children have been born. Want to know about the fascinating (and sometimes scandalous) lives of their children? Check out The Surprising Lives of Victoria’s Children.


Sign up to get the latest news on your favorite dramas and mysteries, as well as exclusive content, video, sweepstakes and more.

Vickers Victoria

Konstruktionsarbetet inleddes 1921 när Royal Air Force (RAF) önskade ett flygplan för trupptransport. I konstruktionstävlingen segrade Victoria över Armstrong Whitworth Awana och Vickers inledde en produktion av modellen.

När man konstruerade flygplanet använde man sig av flygplanskroppen från Vernon och de nykonstruerade vingarna från Virginia. Trots att flygplanet har stora likheter med Virginia ger den rundare flygplanskroppen flygplanet ett mjukare utseende.

Piloterna satt i ett öppet förarkabinutrymme längst fram vid flygplanets nos, medan soldaterna transporterades i en kabin i flygplanskroppen. Vingkonstruktionen var dubbeldäckat där den undre vingen var placerad i nedre kanten av flygkroppens undersida, medan den övre vingen bars upp av sex stöttor på vardera vinghalva och fyra stycken vertikala stöttor från flygplanskroppen. Stabilisatorn var utformad i biplan med rörligt höjdroder på både övre och undre stabilisatorn. Mellan de båda stabilisatorerna fanns två stycken sidroder. Flygplanskroppens främre del var utformad i ett cirkulärt tvärsnitt som övergick till ett kvadratiskt tvärsnitt i aktern. Det främre landstället var placerat rakt under motorgondolerna och var försedda med 2 hjul i vart ställ. Motorgondolerna var placerade nära den nedre vingen och motorerna försågs med tvåbladiga dragande propellrar. Totalt tillverkades 97 exemplar varav många senare konverterades till Vickers Valentia.

The Victoria history of the county of Essex. [Edited by H. Arthur Doubleday and William Page]

v. 1. Natural history.- Early man.- Domesday Survey.--v. 2. Religious houses.- Social and economic history.--v. 3. Roman Essex, with index to vols. 1-3.--v. 4. Ongar Hundred.-- v. 5. Waltham Hundred and Becontree Hundred.--v. 6. Becontree Hundred.--v. 7. The Liberty of Havering-atte-Bower.- Chafford Hundred.--v. 8. Chafford Hundred.- Harlow Hundred.--v. 9. The Borough of Colchester.--v. 10. Lexden Hundred (part)

Addeddate 2007-01-24 17:35:41 Call number AAB-9167 Camera 1Ds Copyright-evidence Evidence reported by scanner-liz-ridolfo for item victoriahistoryo01doubuoft on January 24, 2007: no visible notice of copyright stated date is 1903. Copyright-evidence-date 20070124173456 Copyright-evidence-operator scanner-liz-ridolfo Copyright-region US External-identifier urn:oclc:record:1102232864 Identifier victoriahistoryo01doubuoft Identifier-ark ark:/13960/t94748g6x Lcamid 327166 Openlibrary_edition OL7033291M Openlibrary_work OL16787302W Pages 688 Possible copyright status NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT Ppi 300 Rcamid 331202 Scandate 20070125000429 Scanner ias6 Scanningcenter uoft

Watch the video: RAF Vickers Victoria in Egypte c1930 (June 2022).


  1. Santiago

    You were probably wrong?

  2. Geoff

    I think he is wrong. Let us try to discuss this. Write to me in PM.

  3. Kaylah

    Rather, rather

  4. Sakeri

    I support cleanly, but there's nothing more to say.

  5. Gardner

    This version has become outdated

  6. Tazahn

    Sorry for interfering ... I have a similar situation. I invite you to a discussion. Write here or in PM.

Write a message