Jaguar T4

[JaguarT4]

I know this isn't the best place to put this but hopefully someone will be able to point me in the right direction. I am heading a group of people who would like to see the Jaguars flying once again! We have the opportunity to purchase a 2 seat version the T4. We have most of the money availible to purchase, however, we are looking for the most important members of our team. Engineers and of course Pilots! If anyone has any hours on the above aircraft on either flying or fixing! please send me a message. We will be based somewhere in the south east. Also, anyone who would be interested to join our membership scheme please send me a message! Thank you for your time.

[Monty77]

Can't help, but good luck in your venture. People like you are positive forces in aviation. To the top!:ok:

[JaguarT4]

Thanks Monty.

I am pleased with the feedback we have recieved from the public, although we are at the very start of this venture, I am hopeful of its success. I hope to have a web site up and running within the next month or so and will post it on here once complete! It has been a terrible shame in the past that we have lost our aviation history, and The Vulcan To The Sky trust has been a fantastic venture to improve this situation. Although the Jaguar does not have the cult status the Vulcan has, it is however just as important.

Thank you for taking time to read this!

Regards,

Daniel.

[Bob Viking]

Ok what have you heard? I'm scared now!
BV:E

[JaguarT4]

Ok what have you heard? I'm scared now!
BV:E

I know, I know! They will be out of service soon. I suppose I should say KEEP them flying!

[OpsMunkie]

Was going to say! Just watched one take off a minute ago :)

[Gainesy]

...is it airborne yet?:E

[OCCWMF]

If you want Jag pilots - there's a sqn of them in Lincolnshire.

[JaguarT4]

I am well aware of where there are serving Jag pilots, however I am unsure if the RAF would let them fly a Civvy Jag? If they can then superb, I will try and find some contact details. We are lucky to have 6 guys who are ex RAF techs, 4 airframe and 2 Avionics, however the more the better.

[H Peacock]

I am well aware of where there are serving Jag pilots, however I am unsure if the RAF would let them fly a Civvy Jag?

I don't think the RAF has any say in the matter. Clearly the ac would need to be on the civilian register, and the pilot would need an appropriately endorsed licence (PPL!)

H Peacock :)

[pulse1]

Presumably you have some feedback from the CAA that they would be happy for a Jaguar to fly on a Permit. I was told that they are unlikely to allow anything more complex than a Hunter. It also assumes that the current Design Authority is happy to continue once the military stop flying it. I know that this was a problem with the Sea Vixen which, I believe, was solved by FRA. Presumably BAe have agreed to maintain responsibilty for the Vulcan, should it ever fly again.

Anyway, best of luck. I have always liked the Jaguar and would be pleased to see it continue.

[Spugford]

What makes you think that a Jag is any more 'complex' than a Hunter?!
Just another advanced trainer!

:E

[Radar Muppet]

...except slower!

[OpsMunkie]

Ahhh...its airborne.....Now.

[pulse1]

What makes you think that a Jag is any more 'complex' than a Hunter?!


I really have no idea but wouldn't reheat make it more complex, at least in the eyes of the CAA?

[JaguarT4]

After many emails to the CAA. They are happy to give a permit to any civillian owned Jaguar. The Jaguar is obviously an older ac and therefore is not super complex. Im sure we will have more problems to face but, so far everything looks good. We have a good bunch of guys and a couple of girls. Also a good sponsor! So with everything crossed she will be flying soon....ish!!

[REF]

I'd llove to see one flyng in civvie hands, where will you be basing it? Love to see the website about it - that is when (like the Jaguar) it takes off!!

[The Helpful Stacker]

Presumably you have some feedback from the CAA that they would be happy for a Jaguar to fly on a Permit. I was told that they are unlikely to allow anything more complex than a Hunter. It also assumes that the current Design Authority is happy to continue once the military stop flying it. I know that this was a problem with the Sea Vixen which, I believe, was solved by FRA. Presumably BAe have agreed to maintain responsibilty for the Vulcan, should it ever fly again.
Anyway, best of luck. I have always liked the Jaguar and would be pleased to see it continue.

How far back does design authority have to go? Do the a/c operated by the Old Flying Machine Company or the Shuttleworth Collection have to have DA cover?

[Tim McLelland]

When you say that the CAA said that they'd be happy to certify a Jaguar, is that precisely what they said, or did they just mutter something about being willing to approve it in principle, subject to this or that, and actually mean that you ain't got a snowball's chance in hell? I mean, I wish you the very best of luck, but when the beloved CAA can't even bring themselves to certify a Shackleton, you have to wonder...

[FJJP]

The wartime vintage ac are simple - they don't have complex engine and airframe electronics and systems, for example.

More modern ac, especially mil jets, do need DA support to ensure safe operation, system maintenance, etc.

However, provided the CAA are involved from the start, there's a good chance of gaining their cooperation in projects such as this.

Good luck! It would be good to see such ac kept flying...

[hon_bookie]

Not more to say, but Good Luck. I'll keep watching for the website. Nothing plus or minus any airframe. On the other hand I'll wait for the abuse on liking jaguar's.

[Skeleton]

Don't worry Hon,

The people who snipe at the old girl either don't fly or are wannabe Jag pilots who didn't quite make it :)

I shall miss the "Full hairdryer power" calls though :)

Good luck T4 - I have a feeling the CAA will ruin the project but there you go.

[Flarkey]

I'd be delighted to fly the jag for you. I have never actually flown a jag, nor do I have any CAA approved qualifications, but I do have over 1hr in the back seat of a Hawk and was once a Cadet Warrant Officer in the ATC.

Would you be willing to put me through all the training required?

If so, we're both sorted!!! :ok:


Mr F.

[Greengrass]

Ignore all the rubbish people are saying about the fastest, operational single seat fast jet in the RAF inventory. In fact the only operational single seat fast jet in the RAF inventory, as anything without supersonic capability simply does not count.

I left the RAF MArch 05, as an A2 Jaguar instructor, with 3 years on the OCU, and 1400 hours total Jaguar (with some Buccaneer and Tornado time aswell in case you are considering buying anything else) so I am painfully familiar with the 2 seat variant. Since I no longer have the privilage of flying the old lady, however, I would be delighted to have the chance to renew my aquaintance through a TBird.

You obviously know who to speak to within the CAA, but you may wish to contact Delta Jets at Kemble, as they already operate various retired fast jet types and, I am led to believe, are also keen to get their hands on a Jag on a civvy ticket; they may be able to help.

Best of luck!

[JaguarT4]

I will contact them, thanks for that! I will PM you with some more information!

As to the above cadet, sure we will let you fly it........When you have served in the RAF/Navy on fast jests for few years!! You have one up on me anyway, I have never been in a fast jet, but im bloody looking forward to it, if we can get this project flying, so to speak!

[Lucifer]

Have you spoken to QinetiQ about their recently retired one (I believe)? Might pick up some experience of certifying it as well I imagine.

[foldingwings]

...............but when the beloved CAA can't even bring themselves to certify a Shackleton, you have to wonder...

.......or a Buccaneer!

The CAA would not tolerate the Buccs that went to South Africa on the British Register even temporarily. They had to be on the South African civil register before they could even get airborne just to depart UK airspace!

The team that are trying to get a Bucc airborne out of Scampton have had an inordinate battle with the CAA and, despite some rumour to the contrary recently, may not be out of the woods yet!

I recommend that you engage the CAA formally at the very earliest opportunity to avoid delay to your planned 'civvie' launch! To quote Robbie Burns: "The best laid plans o' mice and men gang aft aglay" In other words, they might have said it's OK but until you have final clearance to do so, your Jag could well be grounded (like most Jags on a hot day!!!!!) for a long time!

And that could be the crippler as far as the CAA is concerned: A Jaguar; a hot or warm day; without appropriate airfield crash assistance; and no arresting mechanisms (ie most civvie airfields)!!

Best of luck.

FW

[kemblejet01]

Deltajets are also looking at Jaguar T4 purchase. Buying it is the easy bit - getting it flying might take the odd miracle, but we are working on it.

Perhaps you would be good enough to contact them - 01285 771494 and get hold of the Chief Pilot.

I am sure we can help each other somehow.

He's a good looking chap and incidentally has 3500 hours on Jags!

Chief Pilot
KMB01

[brickhistory]

kemblejet01,

Check your PMs please.

[Jackonicko]

I'd be delighted to be proved wrong (the T4 is the prettiest FJ in the inventory today), but I was under the impression that a "Mk 8 Canberra" was about as sophisticated as the CAA were prepared to tolerate - hence the problems with Lightning and Buccaneer.

I was led to believe that it's all of the reheat, high pressure hydraulics, AVPIN starters and all the other malarkey of post 1960 fast jets that terrify the CAA rather than the handling aspects - so I guess the question is how 'complicated' is the Jag T4 in a 'systems' sense?

And if you want a PPL-holding press officer with a proven interest in the Jag, and more than a few Jag T2/2A backseat rides under his belt, then look no further.

[Bob Viking]

So you're missing the old girl already?!
Just remember if you get the chance to do any fly-bys, that in a civvy registered aircraft, you must maintain 500 feet clear of person, vessel, vehicle or structures! (I think that's the rule!)
BV:ok:

[Stitchbitch]

Didn't OFMC try and get a Phantom FGR.2 on the register when they left service and were told it was too complex? If the Jag flies again do you think they might change their mind about the 'toom? love to see one of those flying again.:} (as well as a Jag, perhaps paint it in sandy colours and get sponsership from the Sultan..?)

[Tim McLelland]

As I've already said, the CAA have consistently said no to the Buccaneer, Lightning, Phantom (the OFMC one), Shackleton, etc. The guys at Scampton claim they've finally got the CAA's approval for their Buccaneer but who knows? It still hasn't flown, and even if it does (which would be a miracle) it still might not be put in the same category as a Jag which has reheat of course.

Like I asked earlier, what did the CAA actually say? It's all very well saying that they said "they would agree" but I'm assuming (judging by the lack of concrete facts) that they said that they'd agree in principle. Obviously, in civil service-speak this means nothing and ultimately still means "no" once all the provisos and caveats are thrown-up.

I hope the idea is a success, but based on the lessons of history, I think it has virtually no chance of happening.

[OCCWMF]

T4 Cx PMs please

[D SQDRN 97th IOTC]

I spoke with the CAA yesterday.

CAA (so I was told) has received no formal communication / application regarding a permit to fly for a T4 Jag. Not that the CAA wouldn't be adverse to considering such an application, but the plane would probably fall into the complex rather than intermediate category if any permit were to be issued.
However, IMHO, obtaining a permit ab initio for a Jag would not be a trivial or inexpensive matter.

[HHA Eng]

Admirable aims, we know from past experience with the Bucc the difficulties you will encounter in gaining a permit. Have a look at the full story for the Bucc on the Air Scene uk website in the archived articles. www.airsceneuk.org.uk/hangar/2006/bucc/bucc.htm

Not sure what the latest "rumours" are re our Buccaneer but I can assure all that the CAA have stated that it will be given a permit on completion of the agreed work.

The Jag will almost certainly be placed in the complex category (reheat and rocket pack seats). It is a long and arduous battle to get even to the stage where we are now so if you need any advice please feel free to pm me.

[Tim McLelland]

Pretty much as I said/suspected then - the CAA have merely said that they would consider it but of course that's almost the same as saying "no" - it's not gonna happen, nice idea though it may be.

[HHA Eng]

Tim Mc
Are you a bringer of doom and gloom only. Have you ever had any involvement with a project like this or any dealings with the CAA (who may not be as victorian in their approach as you seem to paint). What information and knowledge qualifies you to say that it would be a miracle for the HHA Bucc to fly again or indeed the Jag which is in the embryo stage of the project. I for one support T4 and his team and will endeavour to help where possible.

[Tim McLelland]

What information and knowledge qualifies you to say that it would be a miracle for the HHA Bucc to fly again or indeed the Jag which is in the embryo stage of the project.

er... how about forty years of watching aviation in the UK?
You telling me that getting the Buccaneer certified won't be a miracle?
It would be even more than a miracle if the Jaguar gets certified too, as I've said previously.

Not a bringer of doom and gloom, just the odd reality check. Perhaps you could explain the the purpose or value of threads that drift off into the realms of fantasy and raise people's hopes? You know as well as I do that the CAA are almost certain to refuse any certification of a Jaguar, so please don't suggest that it's anything but extremely unlikely. Great if it does happen but let's not start getting carried away here?:)

[Jackonicko]

Perhaps the lack of blowing, folding wings, and the lack of the Bucc's record of major structural problems might make the CAA view the Jag in a more favourable light than the Bucc. It's also a two-seater with real dual controls, and with seats that are still being supported for other types.

Part Throttle Reheat really shouldn't be such a problem, surely?

[HHA Eng]

A watcher hey, qualification indeed.

[jindabyne]

TM

er... how about forty years of watching aviation in the UK?

Well that's a nice inspirational and convincing reply to HHA's questioning.

[Tim McLelland]

I quite agree - none of these systems would be a problem if the CAA didn't decide they were. This is was amazes me (and others) about the way things are. Who decides what is complex and what isn't? Based on what critera? Patently, it's an arbitary decision and in other countreis (particularly S Africa and the USA) they obviously reach different conclusions.

Pity that someone in the Government does't ask the CAA to have a re-think about their ludicrously over-blown safetly rules and their ridiculously over-cautious certification criteria. Okay, we know that if there was an accident the CAA would be rolling their collective eyes and saying "told you so" but it's a ridiculous (and typically British, or at least European) attitude to adopt. Everything carries a risk and if we have to be obsessively over-cautious about a handful of jet aircraft, we might as well start prohibiting cars on the roads and trains on tracks - as we're much more likely to be killed by them.

It's just another dose of Fun Police tactics, combined with typical British stoicism; the CAA has spoken so we must sit-back and accept their position. Personally, after years of airshow over-regulation, the B-17 saga last year, the sheer absurdity of not even certifying a Shackleton (although it seems a DC-6 is perfectly okay?!) and the continual dislike of high-performance jets, I think someone really should be asking the government to take a long, hard look at the CAA.

[Tim McLelland]

TM
Well that's a nice inspirational and convincing reply to HHA's questioning.

It's concise though, and says it all really. You just need to learn from history, don't you?

[Tim McLelland]

A watcher hey, qualification indeed.

Well if you want to start arguing for the sake of it, I don't see any pearls of wisdom from you to suggest why the outcome could/will be any different to the one I've presumed?

But hey, let's not get into a slanging-match because it's pointless. I'm entitled to a view as are other people, and if you dont agree just because it's not sufficiently rose-tinted, then I'm sorry, but you'd think that if you looked at the CAA's track record on these matters, you really couldn't reach any other conclusion. Unless you think there's something constructive about fantasising?

[Gericault]

I'm quite sure you could get a bunch of suitably qualified ex and serving Jag mates to fly the old girl if the project comes to fruition. Last time I was in Cyprus with Greengrass there was a journo there who was mad keen to get one and keep it on the Cyp register - perhaps something to consider if the CAA angle proves, as I believe it probably will, problematic. Keep me info'd I'd love to be involved with the jet again, damn this desk.

Obviously too much time off down there in Worcestershire then Greengrass?! Like Bob the Viking says, CAA rules are even more stringent than Bucc/Jag ones!!! := :}

Gericault

[brickhistory]

I'm entitled to a view as are other people, and if you dont agree just because it's not sufficiently rose-tinted, then I'm sorry, ......


Well there is this:

A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.

Just a thought.............................

[Skeleton]

Forgive me for this.. I am a Jag Groupie.. Yes i did work on it as the Ops Assistant (Not Clerk - Go away Jag pilots, I helped you for years, they know what i mean)

Let me get this straight, the CAA will not allow ex fast jet military jets to fly because in no particular order:

1: Some of them have reheat. Sorry what difference does that make? Concorde did ok till the frogs decided they knew better and removed the wheel spacers and put on crappy tires, Are the CAA now saying the whole reheat concept is dangerous?

2. Military aircraft are complex, hmmmm so any other ex military/civil aircraft the CAA give a certificate to fly is not complex. I think a few marketing offices and engineers may disagree.

3. Cant get spares, no paperwork/ plans. - This is my favourite and most "Please can i fly this" companies are right. British Wasteaspace are a nightmare - They will support you but in name only and only if they think they are getting good publicity, Vulcan to the sky is a prime example, yes its supported by BA but only so they have got there finger in the pie. Thankfully the Americans have seen the light and thats why lots of fast jets get to fly in America. The manufacturers get little say, thats what insurance is for.

4. Jaguar (shut up Harrier mates) was a good steady weapons platform - at low level. Does that make a difference? It carried weapons that killed people, i take it that although the weapons are not readily available the CAA would insist the weapons control system and wing hardstandings were disabled.

Blame the CAA by all means . Call it a different slant but there not the only ones guilty. BA could and should have sanctioned something by now, be it a Bucc, be it an ex RN/Leuchars F4, there not interested and until they are, and they think there going to make money nothing will move.

As much as I would love to see a Jaguar, flown by Mr Cubin, Mr Pixton, or Mr Gallagher doing the airshow scene - Its not going to happen, till one of the big players makes money out of it. Till then they will risk nothing.

Jackindo forget the back seat, you get in the front, you deserve it - At least you say what you think m8. Lots of high flying folk on here will move into little slots at BA when there careers are over which is why they will say little in reply to your points.

The Jag - The mighty beast. Now its about to be retire, the ONLY, single seat, SUPERSONIC, aircraft in the RAF that actually flew in combat and dropped Bombs will have gone.

Trouble is it will have been the last of its breed and creed, and many would say the best of all of them.

My credentials - 3 Tours as a Jag Ops man. Lots of Jaguar back seats (1000 munute kid) - I bet Mr Cubin could identify me now.

Other Credentials - I worked on a harrier base and quickly realised i was not prepared to bow when a Harrier pilot eneterd the room. If you had bowed in front of a Jag mate, chances are he would have looked behind him to see what you were looking at :)

JAGUAR - The only way to fly!!

[Tim McLelland]

Well as I said earlier, I don't think there is any logic to it. Clearly, you can set all manner of rules and what one person regards as "complex" another might not. Doubtless the CAA have got mountains of paperwork to illustrate the technical facts on which they make their judgements but if you strip-away all the red tape, you're left with an arbitary decision as to what aircraft you judge to be mechanically and/or technically too complicated to be operated by civilians.

Apart from the vaguely insulting notion that an aircraft is going to be flown and maintained less professionally by a civilian group (mostly comprising of ex-RAF types of course), the whole concept is still based on judgement. Patently, other countries make different judgements and I (plus a few thousand others no doubt!) think the CAA have got it very wrong. But you have to assume that we're stuck with what we've got; I can't imagine anyone having the patience and/or stamina to take on a monolith like the CAA. I guess it's their way or no way...

[Skeleton]

Tim your spot on.

The CAA will produce stats out of there ears, and reasons why nothing will fly.

Get British Aerospace on your side, you may have a chance, and i mean PROPERLY on your side.

Kemble and there Hunters have proved a lot of folks wrong and i salute them, but when companies such as the Old Flying Machine Company at Duxford buy what was, by all accounts, a serviceable F4 and very quickly ditch the idea of flying it once they asked the CAA what an initial agreement to fly meant, it gives some idea of the scale of the task involved and more importantly the backing that is required.


JAGUAR - Now we know why god gave fighters 2 engines!!

[foldingwings]

Perhaps the lack of ....... foldingwings,..........?


I'm still here!!

FW

[BBS889]

I know this is a thread reference the possibility of a Civvie Jag, but I am with HHA Eng on the whole Bucc saga, so much so, that I have been searching through the CAA website and found this http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/286/CAA%20Board%20Minutes%20Feb%202006.pdf

Yep, its a PDF, go to page 4 and then to the 4th Bullet down.

[HHA Eng]

TMc-
Sorry about the little dig, couldn't resist it and you do raise some valid points about the discrepancies between legislative bodies around the world and the CAA. That said the achievement thus far in gaining WRITTEN authority to fly the BUCC heightens the level of achievement.

No miracles have been involved in the generation of this task the success so far with the Bucc has been down to pure hard work, determination, diplomacy and the regard in which the CAA hold HHA.

[blue up]

Spare Jag fuselages on U-cart at St Athan this week. At least 2 engineless outside and one inside. Went for a tour of the White Elephant Kennel (aka Superhangar).

The 3 VC-10s get crushed in the next few weeks.:{

[Fishtailed]

I (plus a few thousand others no doubt!) think the CAA have got it very wrong. But you have to assume that we're stuck with what we've got; I can't imagine anyone having the patience and/or stamina to take on a monolith like the CAA. I guess it's their way or no way...
Imagine this:- The RAF become strapped for cash and to raise money they 'outsorce/contract/sell' the BBMF to a private organisation like Air Atlantic or similar. Would the CAA allow City of Lincoln to fly on the civil register? If they didn't there would be national outcry and Questions would be asked in Parliament!!

[Tim McLelland]

I don't know what would happen. Presumably the Lancaster would be certified, as it's hardly a "complex" aircraft, but then the CAA won't even certify a Shackleton, so who knows? On the other hand, I do wonder why the RAF hangs-on to the BBMF when the country is already well supplied by a number of privately-owned Spitfires and even Hurricanes. Just seems a tad pointless to me. You'd think that even if an outight "sell-off" was too much to swallow, there ought to be some sort of scope for some kind of "semi privatised" arrangement? But who knows; I guess the only certainty on that score is that when the BBMF finally does become too expensive to maintain, the aircraft will still be around long after the BBMF has gone, so at least we don't have to lose any sleep on that score. However, over at Bruntingthorpe I see that things are sliding from bad to worse (see the appropriate thread elsewhere)...

[kemblejet01]

Just had to and fro with CAA about T4, and I must say, they were refreshingly positive about the project. The Deltajets team will now pursue the feasibility of operating a T4 and we'll take it from there.

KMB01

[JagRigger]

If you are serious.... but can I persuade the wife to let me play with one

[Truck2005]

Best be quick with the frames at SA. A few of them were seen trunddling down the road on the back of 40 footers the other day. Heading for the east coast, I think.

[Skeleton]

And Truck?

The Jaguar they are trying to keep in the air is not headed to the south coast.

You only need to look at the present day Tonka fleet to realize storage at St Athan may not be a death knell.

Certainly Jaguars have re-appeared from Shawbury and the Tardis hanger. The Jag needed a lot of money spent on it mid life following the sticky leg problem and spar issues. Not all survived that cull, it was not all about a cockpit upgrade.

The Jags heading to meet there maker via the south coast are VERY old examples, at best the single seats are a mixtue of GR1's and a bit, as it happens I think a standard edition Jag as issued to the RAF should be kept -= Might open some eyes, and I am talking when the hand controller for the NAVWASS was very heads in, slightly below the paper moving map!!

Lets keep this on track, Its about trying to keep a flying example of an aircraft that has given extraordinary service to this country airborne. For all folk carp about it, it has for 30 years given the RAF sterling service, and at the end of the day it was only shot down in combat by a F4 pilot on the same side!!

The Tornado and Harriers (hopefully soon) turn will come. Till then lets give it our full support, lets just move away from the Jags in storage at St Athan / Shawbury concept. Half the RAF fleet is in storage, that's just the way it is.


As i said- Jaguar the only SUPERSONIC, single seat, aircraft that dropped bombs for this country. (Sorry Harrier mates, your not supersonic - as much as the Jags claim may be tenious and impractible, you just can't)