20 Squadron

[speedbirdzerozeroone]

How is it that a GMTV presenter can go for a jaunt in a T10 and I can’t…? (lol)

1) Did GMTV pay any money?
2) How long did the flight last and for what duration?
3) What are the rules on this type of ‘entertaining’?

PS. I think its fantastic and a brilliant way to demonstrate the RAF to Joe public. I just wondered on the logistics of such a ‘flight.’

PPS. Mr Sheppard claimed to have not been sick in a ‘jet’ unlike Mr Clarkson. However, I see no one explained to him the maximum speed of a T10 compared to an F15? …Just a thought.

You know who you are….

Regards,

001

[Champagne Anyone?]

WONKER!!!:E :p :p

[Flap62]

However, I see no one explained to him the maximum speed of a T10 compared to an F15?

And what is the relationship between being airsick and "top speed"?

Top Trumps has a lot to answer for.

[NoseGunner]

Well Mr Clarkson got a trip in a fast jet

Whereas GMTV only got a jet!

:D

[FFP]

Thought he went up in an F3 ?:confused:

[dirtygc]

Mr Shepard did indeed also fly in an F3 at Leuchars as I believe he was 'best man' at his tonka drivers wedding the following day (it's in the RAF News).

The T10 trip came about due to his friendship with a pilot from 20 sqn and the fact that he is a z list celeb
;)

[speedbirdzerozeroone]

Flap 62.

If I was given the challenge:

‘Your mission is to take up a TV presenter and ‘impress’ on him the ‘rigours’ of fast jet flying.’

“…and I had 2 airframes to choose from. The T10 or the F15. I know which one I’d pick to make the challenge easier…..”

Your effectively suggesting a T10 has the same or superior performance/flight envelope than an F15, which for a man so obviously well versed in ‘top trumps’ is an incredibly brave move. (Any thoughts of the use of STOVL capabilities to induce sickness in Mr Sheppard (not that they would) are not under question as I believe he had a nice rolling takeoff. Mr Clarkson had afterburners, climb to CAP altitude and a few inverted rolls on the way up to get there faster before any ‘acrobatics’. I don’t think Mr Sheppard honestly has grounds for comparison sat in a T10.). Nice bit of morning telly though, don’t get me wrong…


--

Dirty: It’s not what you know but who you know.

--

How do the RAF justify these ‘flights.’ How many are there per year?

As the RAF must be seen to be ‘organised’ surely there are key criteria. It surely can’t just be a question of, 1) He’s a mate of a pilot, 2) He’s a celeb. “O alright he’s in.” …..Is it?

Reminds me of when Ewan McGregor took a flight in an F3 piloted by his brother; Colin. Whilst this sort of flying had been going on for years, there must be rules on it; what are they?

[A2QFI]

In the late 70s the system was that the media were allocated 4 FJ trips per year and some media organisation sorted out the allocations. The payback was either some television or print coverage. On this scheme I got to give a trip in an F4, from Coningsby, to a reporter from the Yorkshire Post; the paper seemed surprised to have been awarded the trip and the only person they could think of to send was the Sports Editor. He was sick but he did very well, got the radar locked on and worked a few things in the rear cockpit. Earlier, in Germany, I gave an F4 trip (officially) to a reporter from Flight. This was covered in a 3 or 4 page illustrated article so I guess the publicity/advertising aspect of the scheme worked well on that occasion.

[speedbirdzerozeroone]

Brilliant A2QFI. Thats more like it.

[ranger703]

Sour grapes comes to mind immediately here,I can't go so why should they?

All publicity is good publicity these days for the recruiters and if it helps just 1 kid out there to aspire to becoming a RAF pilot then its money well spent.

PS.Colin MacGregor flew his brother in a GR4 not an F3.

[Head to Earth]

Speedbird Zero,

Top Trumps will also tell you that the RAF does not currently have any F15s in it's inventory, therefore if tasked to fly a TV presenter in order to keep the positive sides of the RAF in public view then I think the Harrier was probably quite a good choice. Also, the point is to make sure the pax has an enjoyable experience and therefore whatever the 'performance limits' of the aircraft are it is up to the pilot to stop said TV presenter from being sick at all. I can assure you Zero that if you were to come flying with me, not that I would ever give you the chance, I would be sure to make you throw up in a very short space of time and I don't go nearly as fast as a 15. Speed is not everything you know...

Well done 20 Sqn, shame about the music...

PS I don't think that 'a few inverted rolls on the way up' will get any aircraft to altitude faster but I will go and check my playing cards to make sure.:hmm:

[BEagle]

Well, actually it will, smarty pants. Because the negative 'g' limit is much lower than the positive 'g' limit. So, when approaching the assigned altitude in a high performance jet, it is quicker to roll inverted and pull hard to the level off attitude, then roll erect than it is to thottle back and pitch to the level attitude - or even to push to the negative 'g' limit to stop the climb approaching the assigned altitude.

We were taught this on the Gnat. On early trips we throttled back and began to level off at around 1500 ft to the assigned altitude; on later trips we waited until a few hundred feet to go, rolled inverted, pulled to 3 or 4 g, levelled off and rolled erect....

The braver guys did the same thing at low level to avoid ballooning over hills :ooh: !!

[Head to Earth]

Thank you BEagle, it has been a long time since I have been called smarty pants, but only a few days since I rolled inverted in a fast jet in order to capture an altitude more quickly! However, I'm still pretty sure that doing this a number of times will only slow my climb to height...

Techniques aside, I was only trying to point out the faults in the great Double O's 'thought processes'. Besides, I believe there were indeed some 'VSTOL' (not STOVL) events carried out on this flight, that although did not cause any discomfort to Mr GMTV certainly caused a few wide eyes on the ground...!

There are plenty of rules on this subject Speedy, a thorough process involving many MOD departments took place before Mr S was allowed anywhere near a Harrier. Send in your own application now :p

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

Every PAX form I have ever seen has limited the flight envelope to +4.5g/-0.5g (can't remember the max Alt without a chamber run?) so surely it doesn't make too much difference what FJ you are in - you could make 'em hurl in a tutor for a £150!
Are these limits also applied to media trips?
Otherwise, I thought it was some much needed good PR for the RAF, though one of the weather girls would have looked much better in the back of a T10.

[Tarnished]

Pedant mode on.

I bow to the undoubted superior knowledge of the likes of A2QFI and BEagle but just what exactly is an inverted roll when compared to a roll (to the) inverted?

I would venture that said GMTV trip included a few aileron rolls on the way up and depending upon just how they we co-ordinated and executed they may or may not have had an effect in the climb performance.

To my mind an inverted roll is something like an outside barrel roll (very uncomfortable).

Pedant mode off.

As far as who and why FJ trips are doled out it is in the remit of the squadron commander (with a courtesy info to OC Ops and Stn Cdr) to authorize "pax" trips. The only proviso IIRC was that it was for the greater good of the air force. Press coverage of event was considered good. Mayors, Chief of Police, Pop Stars etc could all fall into the good publicity bucket.

Though why the Sun reporter got the first Typhhon ride beats me when there are many technical aviation writers which would have been a better investment if you ask me, but they don't ask me, which explains everything!!

Tarnished

[Soiled Glove]

why the Sun reporter got the first Typhhon ride

Maybe it was easier to impress the Sun reporter than the technical aviation writers!

In its current guise, all Typhoon needs is a furry dice on the coaming to impress a Sun reporter/reader, whereas the technical writers might prefer a working and serviceable Tranche 2 model to be suitably impressed.

[speedbirdzerozeroone]

Ranger: Not at all mate. Just another avenue of curiosity over where the nations tax money ‘can’ be spent and ‘how’ it’s decided upon. As Soiled Glove points out, it’s much easier to impress a red top dime bar than a trade journal professional. Although, it’ll be interesting to see how many ppruners (that have waxed lyrically in this thread about making the RAF available to the masses, etc) rant about 1 detail the tabloid writer gets wrong and how they should employ ‘professionals’ to cover such jaunts. You just watch…again. Sorry it was the F15E direction of the thread which made me say F3, luckily I don’t get many Gr4s round my way.

Tarnished: i) Beg pardon. 1 detail was the Roll to the inverted. ii) 'So the station commander uses his own discretion if he can legitimately prove that it’s for the greater good of the air force. Ok that makes crystal sense. Cheers…but I have another question.'

'What limits the number of celebs that are taken up in a year….? What’s seen as taking the p#ss. I’m sure taking the entire England cricket team up would also have a positive effect on demonstrating the RAF to many young talented sportsmen. (but of course that’s a lot of tax payers money (et al). Is the limit imposed financially or on a headcount basis? (This example isn’t meant to inflame but elucidate.)'


Head to Earth: Wrong. If you don’t know that rolls to the inverted get aircraft to altitude quicker, you can keep your invitation. Although thanks for proving my original point that the ‘GMTV man’ has absolutely no grounds for comparison.

Aynayda Pizaqvick: Cheers.

(BTW: I have nothing against T10s you know…don’t be so overprotective)

001

[Flap62]

I think what muddies the water is this "waste of taxpayers money blah". Twin stickers regularly fly about with the boot empty so sticking a bod in doesn't really cost much. If the sortie was specifically generated then the hours will probably go against someones monthly continuation training and so would have been used anyway so still no cost to the taxpayer.

[Tarnished]

001,

Stn Cdr's discretion comes down to just that. Fine taste and good judgement. These things by definition attract attention. If OC RAF XXX has his name or his station on the front page on a regular basis his AOC is going to start asking questions. Nobody is free from supervision!

Costs are a strange animal. What is the extra cost of flying a pax? In a twin crew aircraft, the navigator looses out on some flying time. In a twin seat version of a single seat fleet there is possible a little less flight time due to less starting fuel. The pilot has to fly to stay current, the jet was going to fly anyway. Its all already in the budget use it or loose it! There is good training value (experience) for the pilot in looking after someone who is totally new to the environment. Taking up a pax is not a no-brainer. I took a pax in a Hunter once who grabbed hold of my arm at the first turn after take off and took some convincing that he wasn't going to fall out! I bore the finger imprints for days.

The pax has to be approved, there is a medical required and the insurance bods get involved, the guy gets fitted out in flying kit that get laundered after he flies (cost a few quid). He then needs to have egress/ejection/survival instruction, some distraction of manpower required to do this but there is no overtime in the forces.

The judgement required by those approving the flight is "how will this be viewed by the outside world" what other deserving cases are there out there from within the service. Air trafficers are a good example of good cases for a famil ride. A 'well done' reward for a hard working individual, long service recognition even a compasionate return home trips have all happened. SMO, SEngO, OC Admin (when he has the impress (imprest) money on a ranger)

In the Hawk world it was easy, a lot of spare back seats come up when there are instructors in formation leads with a solo student on the wing (pax flies with instructor not student). It becomes a bit more of a burden if there are certain things the pax "has" to do in the likes of a Tornado. In any "trainer" which can be flown solo its a far easier case.

If you are asking "what do I need to do to get a trip" (assuming you are not currently serving) then the easiest way is to get into the TA or RAF(VR) and write to the station. Otherwise become a local dignitary, chief of police, chief of fire brigade. Maybe even become a sports star or pop star (I flew Gary Numan years ago).

Hope this helps

Tarnished

[Soiled Glove]

The way I see it:

Most 'celebs' haven't a clue what is going on, normally feel ill and curtail the sortie while having their jolly and the average punter who watches the programmes they make hasn't a clue anyway;

a technical writer's comments will be ignored anyway as most of us have an already informed opinion of an aircraft and will dismiss the article as propaganda;

and finally why is it ATC girls with large t*ts always get to the front of the queue when detachment pax trips are on offer?

SG

PS If you want to fly celebs join the airlines!

[Head to Earth]

Attention All Air Forces!!!

Change your SOPs, Speedbird 001 has calculated that 'a few inverted rolls will get you to altitude faster!' Revolutionary... I wonder why Interceptors all over the world have not been spiralling to height since flight began! Although it is clear that an inverted pull can help you to capture an altitude more quickly (see previous posts...) I am not wrong at all when I state that doing a few on the way up will not get you there ANY faster, perhaps even slower. I hate nit pickers but I also hate being told I'm wrong when I'm clearly not.

Come to think of it, with my nit picking head on, I never extended you an invite to fly with me, I stated that I would never give you the opportunity, so how you can refuse it I'm not entirely sure. Also, I did not prove any point of yours - I maintain that speed has nothing to do with being airsick and is therefore irrelevant as comparison - ask any ATC cadet trudging along at 90 kts (or whatever speed you pedant) and filling the old white bags.

YOU are wrong on 3 more counts, you're not actually a Speedbird pilot are you...?:eek:

[Tarnished]

Twaddle.

001 said: If you don’t know that rolls to the inverted get aircraft to altitude quicker.....

and

and a few inverted rolls on the way up to get there faster .....

FFS read what is being written and learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. Learn to say what you mean and think about what you are really saying.

Here is all you need to know about climb performance: http://flighttest.navair.navy.mil/unrestricted/FTM108/c7.pdf start at page 13.

BEagle's discussion is actually about the quicked way to capture and maintain a specific or assigned altitude as opposed to the most altitude gain in the shortest time. Anything like banking, rolling, pushing or pulling the aircraft's flight path away from its optimum climb schedule will result in less that optimum time to height, the quickest way to capture a particular altitude at the end of said climb is to roll and pull.

Tarnished

[Soiled Glove]

Tarnished

Congratulations on the prize for most complex attachment - if you can't blind them with brilliance baffle them with bullsh*t springs to mind!

SG

[Tarnished]

Thank you SG, that is my family motto, we have lived by it for many generations.

Thing is I used to understand everything in that book - I've got a certificate to prove it!

Tarnished

[speedbirdzerozeroone]

Tarnished: A truly informed response. Just what I was after.

Soiled: ATC girls with large t#ts? ..wtf..lol

--

Head to Earth: Woe boy I sense a little hostility…chill your boots…

I’m not nit picking at all. If I was nit picking I’d have originally suggested that unless you were the OC of 20 Sqdn, then you had absolutely no grounds for making a statement suggesting the possibility of “giving anyone the chance” of flying with you. However even if I indulge you a second time, I fear that ‘no invitation’ is no great loss to myself or the remainder of the world’s population as potential backseaters and to be honest consider it a mercy for both parties, as I’m sure would your OC.

If I did have your job I could continue this banter indefinitely but as I’m sure we’ve both now reached a mutual level of contempt for each other I must admit that your not really much sport anymore….

….charming syntax btw, it reminds me of a 72(R) Sqdn northerner who was also the ‘first ever pilot.’ Almost endearing…., almost.

001