PDA

View Full Version : DOMINIE OFF RUNWAY AT CARDIFF


KPax
1st Jun 2006, 23:01
Anyone know what happened with the Dominie that left the rw at Cardiff tonight. Everyone ok.

it_was_me
2nd Jun 2006, 01:12
Yeah all on board were ok. According to guy there, the nose wheel just buggered up somehow and ended up with the jet dug into the grass. St.Mawgan were deciding how to deal with it.

stiknruda
2nd Jun 2006, 06:05
Are they still letting navs fly these in and out of civvy 'dromes? :E

ShyTorque
2nd Jun 2006, 10:35
What were St. Mawgan planning on doing anyway? Driving from Cornwall to Wales to put foam on the runway?.....

Or did it go a very long way off the runway?

Truck2005
2nd Jun 2006, 11:50
Could not have gone very far at either end. It is a bit wet one end but there is a good pub in Penmark at the other end;)

it_was_me
3rd Jun 2006, 12:43
Im sure those navs made it to the pub alright. It veered off quite abit and got heavily bogged down in the wet mud. Its out now, but talkin to the gingers its seems they think the airframe could have been stressed to cat 5. They have one in the hangar they have been wantin to scrap to keep with the numbers, but they may now choose this one to take its place. We shall see. And yep navs still bein trusted in and out of civvy places. Chav Navs!!!

BEagle
3rd Jun 2006, 19:56
Every other 125 in the European JAA world is required to have a 2 pilot crew

What makes the Dominie so different? Are there any other twin turbojet transport type aircraft flying with only one pilot?

The Dominie often used to fly with a 'pilot's friend' in the RHS - but what excuse is there in this day and age for the RAF not complying with the same rules as everyone else?

Just This Once...
3rd Jun 2006, 20:59
Every other 125 in the European JAA world is required to have a 2 pilot crew.
What makes the Dominie so different?

The lack of fare paying passengers.

Simple really.

BEagle
3rd Jun 2006, 21:07
Rot.

The regulations do not make any distinction regarding the use of the aeroplane. Even an empty 125 must carry a 2 pilot crew.

fergineer
3rd Jun 2006, 21:31
Don't the regs also state that the pilots must be licenced as well....how many pilots flying the Dom have licences. I had a wonderful tour flying in the RHS of the Dom learnt a lot as well as having fun.....The guys flying as PA's are well trained and are current at landing the Dom, they get checked just as often as the pilots.......Maybe its that the one winged race have been encroaching on the two winged master races territory and it makes them nervous:) . Seriously Beags the guys flying there are quite capable unless of course they are the students!!!!

Flt Lt Spry
4th Jun 2006, 00:19
So how come a twin engined jet (Tornado, for example) can be flown by a single pilot? (I know that it only has one pilot's seat (apart from the trainer which has 2, before you start).)

What makes the 125 any more complex than that? Or are they just banking on the fact that the pilots aren't as sharp so they need 2?

rudekid
4th Jun 2006, 01:45
Beagle

Once again your inability to differentiate between military aviation and civil aviation lets you down.

Ever heard of an MAR?

H Peacock
4th Jun 2006, 05:25
Quote "Even an empty 125 must carry a 2 pilot crew"

Well it's not empty then is it?

More seriously though, surely the RAF can operate an aircraft as it sees fit. We used to be able to ferry the Puma just as a single pilot, as long as you left the gear down. I'm sure the civies would never allow that. (Not sure that we do anymore.)

:D

pma 32dd
4th Jun 2006, 07:44
Back to the real thread. As I understand it, the aircaft wil be flown back Monday morning. Hardly cat 5.

foldingwings
4th Jun 2006, 08:23
OK, so how come Global Hawk and Predator can ever get airborne if you must have a pilot!!

ComJam
4th Jun 2006, 12:25
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v667/Falcon20/d4d41545.jpg

Just slightly off the runway (which is visible in the background) :)

wye-ayeviator
5th Jun 2006, 17:17
... http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=226981


With ME pilots rapidly running off to join the 'er-Lines', I think the RAF's answer (of using experienced aviators as a safety 'pilot') is sensible and cost effective.

Just my two-penneth.

Always_broken_in_wilts
5th Jun 2006, 17:25
"With ME pilots rapidly running off to join the 'er-Lines', I think the RAF's answer (of using experienced aviators as a safety 'pilot') is sensible and cost effective."

Wot a load of tosh:ugh: It's a well known fact that all Nav's are failed pilots so what the bl@@dy hell are we doing letting them do something they already failed........so to speak:E

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

threepointonefour
5th Jun 2006, 17:47
Anyone languishing in Wilts falls into 1 of 4 cats;

1. Failed FJ pilot.
2. Ex FJ pilot no longer 'able' to handle the rigours of Geee!
3. Failed FJ Nav
4. Hostess

Touche.
:p

Confucius
5th Jun 2006, 18:24
Anyone languishing in Wilts falls into 1 of 4 cats;

3. Failed FJ Nav


Touche.
:p

Well, I was too old to go pilot (24 on joining, long story, such is life). I always wanted to go C-130s since starting nav school, couldn't understand any nav wanting fj. Of course I was deemed to have an 'attitude problem' as a result of my chosen path. The last time I saw one of those who mocked was when he was a co-pilot on VC-10s!

Got to where I wanted though, and wouldn't have changed a thing (apart from altering a multitude of events that led to me joining too late for pilot - and wouldn't have wanted fj in that case either).

BigGrecian
5th Jun 2006, 18:45
It's a well known fact that all Nav's are failed pilots
Not any more - only one shot at aircrew nowadays. So don't screw it up!

Always_broken_in_wilts
6th Jun 2006, 08:19
What I meant was that during their application process they "failed", normally due to fitness/co ordination issues or the like, after all you can't expect anyone to belive people ACTUALLY apply to be Nav's:p

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

threepointonefour
6th Jun 2006, 11:02
after all you can't expect anyone to belive people ACTUALLY apply to be Nav's:p

Ditto for the Wiltshire Hosties.

:p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p

possel
6th Jun 2006, 11:17
Rot.

The regulations do not make any distinction regarding the use of the aeroplane. Even an empty 125 must carry a 2 pilot crew.

When I worked on Dominies (long time ago), the second crew member was called the pilot's assistant. The only essential reason for his presence was to operate something which the captain could not reach from his seat - I think it was part of the pressurization system. You hardly have to be an expensively trained pilot to do that!

In general the PA was instructors from the Nav and Air Eng school - once I remember OC Air Nav School closing the right hand throttle instead of selecting full flap on final...

airborne_artist
6th Jun 2006, 11:43
Every other 125 in the European JAA world is required to have a 2 pilot crew

What makes the Dominie so different? Are there any other twin turbojet transport type aircraft flying with only one pilot?

But you can't generally pick and choose the rules you choose to obey and the ones you won't. To operate it under JAA should captain and co should have JAA licences? Should the aircraft be maintained in accordance with the regime? It might not stop there, even.

Brain Potter
6th Jun 2006, 13:40
The Dominie is not operated under JAA regulations. It is a military aircraft operated under a MAR that allows operation by single pilot plus PA. The RAF 125 is regarded as a different type, but is still operated under a MAR (that requires 2 pilots) however it is similarly not subject to JAA regulations and can therefore be fitted with equipment that would preclude civil certification. The MoD can choose to operate to JAA regulations as a 'best practice' model but is responsible for certifying it's own ac under MAR and I don't believe that JAA has any regulatory over-sight of this process. This explains why, for example, some military transport ac do not have EGPWS, even though it has been a required fit by the JAA and it's pre-cursors for many years.

OCCWMF
6th Jun 2006, 17:40
We used to be able to ferry the Puma just as a single pilot, as long as you left the gear down.


Typhoo pilots have to leave the gear down on single pilot ops as well:E

Could you not be trusted to put them down before landing?

H Peacock
7th Jun 2006, 05:25
Typhoo pilots have to leave the gear down on single pilot ops as well:E

Could you not be trusted to put them down before landing?

The problem with the Puma was that the Emergency Undercarriage lowering hand pump could not be operated from the righthand seat. If flying solo and you did inadvertently put the gear up after takeoff (a bit like trying not to flush a toilet when told not to - you'll probably do it automatically!) you'd have a job getting it down again if the normal hydraulics failed.

H Peacock

GlosMikeP
7th Jun 2006, 18:13
The Dominie is not operated under JAA regulations. It is a military aircraft operated under a MAR that allows operation by single pilot plus PA. The RAF 125 is regarded as a different type, but is still operated under a MAR (that requires 2 pilots) however it is similarly not subject to JAA regulations and can therefore be fitted with equipment that would preclude civil certification. The MoD can choose to operate to JAA regulations as a 'best practice' model but is responsible for certifying it's own ac under MAR and I don't believe that JAA has any regulatory over-sight of this process. This explains why, for example, some military transport ac do not have EGPWS, even though it has been a required fit by the JAA and it's pre-cursors for many years.

Absolutely right. This is because the military authorities have an airworthiness structure and regime that is held to be the equivalent of that administered by the CAA etc. Hence military aircraft operate under MAR, not (in general) JAA, although as you say, such matters may be taken into consideration and incorporated.