First A-330 delivered?

[hunty]

Gents

I hear that the RAFs first A-330 (ZZ331) was seen arriving at Boscombe Down today.

Hunty :cool:

[RAFEngO74to09]

Confirmed here.

First Tristar replacement begins trials in UK | British Forces News (http://www.bfbs.com/news/uk/first-tristar-replacement-begins-trials-uk-46807.html)

[Shell Management]

Great news - solid progress.:ok:

Well done to everyone at Air Tanker:D

[Cannonfodder]

Can't come quick enough. Rumour has it the Tristars have fallen over again.

[NutLoose]

It is being named Voyager.

Does that mean it will disappear shortly into the Delta Quadrant?? To boldly go where no one has gone before.... :O

Or is it tied in to the US Banks Voyager fuel cedit card LOL :p

[TBM-Legend]

I would have thought the 'fishnet stocking' brigade from Whitehall would have called 'her' the VOYEUR KC Mk1 :oh:

....or BiStar KC Mk1

[airborne_artist]

From BBCi:

"It is twice the size of a Lancaster bomber ...

It can refuel another aircraft in the air with 100,000 litres of fuel, more than the amount contained by two large petrol tankers.

The Ministry of Defence said it can refuel at a rate of 5,000 litres per minute, compared with a pump at a garage that delivers fuel at 40 litres per minute."

No mention of those eternal units of comparison, the football pitch and the London bus. How far would the big red public transporter travel on the contents of the Voyeur, for example?

[EyesFront]

How big in comparison with Wales?

[airborne_artist]

How big in comparison with Wales?

A Routemaster bus is quoted as doing 10 mpg. On that basis the 100,000 litres of fuel contained in ZZ331 would power a Routemaster for 237 trips round the coastline and border of Wales.

Think of all the pies the drivers and the WSOp, sorry, conductor could eat during such a trip :8

[Halton Brat]

Airborne Artist

I have used viamichelin.com to survey the route you describe for your Routemaster bus trip around the coast & borders of Wales, and would respectfully advise you that there are numerous low bridges that will give you the first Routemaster Cabrio version.

(mustabinanav)

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

the first Routemaster Cabrio version


Actually the second...remember Live And Let Die, and the bus chase under the low bridge?:8:8

[BEagle]

Live and let Die? Ah yes, Jane Seymour, Madeleine Smith....and someone called Moore.

[SASless]

I hope it turns out better than the Chinook purchases!

[NutLoose]

:p Well considering the first Chinooks we bought had a cobbled up system to fit a couple of old Andover Ferry tanks into the cabin, this is already streets ahead. Still you could use a Chinook as a Harrier GPU..... Not that that is is needed anymore either..... :E

[GIATT]

Can I ask why it was not delivered to Brize Norton and put straight into service?

It would appear that all the pre-delivery testing will now start and the actual delivery date is some considerable time in the future. Why is it being "delivered" if it needs more than pre-flight checks?

[NutLoose]

To allow the RAF to write the operating manual and work out the best way to use it and also the limitations on it in service. There is a difference between acceptance checks and in service usage, the book now has to be written on that for the various types it will encounter in its service life... I would think the initial testing would have covered very few types.

[forget]

To allow the RAF to write the operating manual and work out the best way to use it and also the limitations on it in service.

Eh? So why aren't such things as 'operating manuals' completed beforehand. Likewise - limitations in service.

[Cows getting bigger]

It would appear that it isn't just the RAF's largest aircraft ever, it will also be the lowest flying one.

From the RAF website (future capability)

Specifications
Engines: 2
Thrust: 72,000lbs each
Max speed: 648kph
Length: 193ft
Max altitude: 0ft
Span: 198ft
Aircrew: 3

[GIATT]

To allow the RAF to write the operating manual and work out the best way to use it and also the limitations on it in service.

Why was that not being done at the same time the plane was being built? I've worked on commissioning large industrial plant and we had to have the SOPs, operations manuals, and all the staff trained ready for the day after the various contractors walked out. There then followed a one month period to confirm that our manuals matched the practical implementations of the equipment. (It was our first completely computer controlled thin film plant c/w all sorts of new and novel control gear that had never been used before). Oh and from day one of the confirmation period we were producing product for shipping, we just had a 100% scrappage allowance for a month.

If you've still to work out the best way to use it and what it's limitations are then it sounds like you're still at the specification stage of the project.

[Jig Peter]

Nice to see that there's real progress with the A330 tanker/transport, but what's the timeline from now on?
How long will it take for Cobham to "get up to speed" ?
How long will it take for the Boscombe Down team to get their writings done ?
How long will it be before AirTanker has the means to do its job, and what's the date for the delivery of the last aircraft in this order??
How long do the sturdy TriStars have to flog on before their complete retirement ?
Is Airbus Military capacity limited ?
As the main A330 line moves up to a 9/month rate, could the delivery rate of the Tanker/Transport version be accelerated, or is it constrained by a combination of Toulouse, Madrid/Seville and Cobham?

As so often I get the impression that "decisions to do" are mistaken for "Mission Accomplished".

As I wrote at the start, it is good to see some progress ... ... but there's a heck of a way to go still.

PS. Given that an earlier Voyager by Mr. Rutan did a REALLY long flight and enjoys its retirement on display, will the MoD's naming specialists now add a "II" to the name it has chosen ?

[brakedwell]

Let's hope nobody bends it :E

[Chidken Sangwich]

Can I just correct the opening post on this thread...

"I hear that the UK Tax Payer's first A330 (ZZ331) was seen arriving at Boscombe Down today."

[airborne_artist]

"I hear that the UK Tax Payer's first A330 (ZZ331) was seen arriving at Boscombe Down today." CS - I think you'll find that they belong to some greedy/generous* banks. AirTanker has borrowed £13Bn from them, I believe.

*delete as appropriate

[Sonorguy]

Quote:
the first Routemaster Cabrio version
Actually the second...remember Live And Let Die, and the bus chase under the low bridge?:8:8

I can't believe I actually know this and it's an admission of deep nerdiness but as a point of order it wasn't a Routemaster it was a Leyland RT.

Pulls on anorak and grabs flask......:O

[BEagle]

I used to think that bus-spotting was rather a.....'special interest' hobby...:8

Then I found out that there is actually a group which considers spotting manhole covers and drains to be interesting. I kid you not. Well, I suppose it takes all sorts, but drainspotting :hmm:???

[A2QFI]

Described by a local newspaper reporter as "Based on the A 380, the World's largest passenger aircraft" which shows real in depth research or was the MOD handout wrong? Perhaps they don't know what they are leasing!

[incubus]

PS. Given that an earlier Voyager by Mr. Rutan did a REALLY long flight and enjoys its retirement on display, will the MoD's naming specialists now add a "II" to the name it has chosen ?

Voyager 2:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Voyager.jpg/290px-Voyager.jpg

[Army Mover]

Described by a local newspaper reporter as "Based on the A 380, the World's largest passenger aircraft" which shows real in depth research or was the MOD handout wrong? Perhaps they don't know what they are leasing!Perhaps the RAF have invested in some "Transformer" style technology? Optimus Prime for CAS?

[Lyneham Lad]

I used to think that bus-spotting was rather a.....'special interest' hobby...

Then I found out that there is actually a group which considers spotting manhole covers and drains to be interesting. I kid you not. Well, I suppose it takes all sorts, but drainspotting ???

But how about The Pylon Appreciation Society (http://www.pylons.org/). A quote from the website "the Pylon Appreciation Society is a club for people who appreciate electricity pylons." Takes all sorts, I suppose... :ooh:

[Willard Whyte]

Hmm, I still want to know how many football fields it needs to land etc.

However long a football field is that is, I have no interest in the game.

[cessnapete]

Tend to agree, this is basically a mature airliner with thousands of hours airline service. Hanging a couple of pods under the wings can make little change to aerodynamics and presumably the manufacturer will have all the performance figures from the months of testing carried out at Seville by Airbus.
The similar Australian A330 figures are also available.
Can't see why six + more months required at Boscombe to get it into service.
Crew training doesnt take long these days and there is already an A330 Tanker sim up and running.

(With u/s TriStars littered around the routes at the moment and ongoing maintenance issues, the A330 can't be in service soon enough!!)

[Geehovah]

Great to see an aircraft coming into service rather than another news report of a fleet retiring:ok:

[NutLoose]

Suprised they bought the in flight refuelling gear, after all a tanker without it would be like A carrier without planes.

[aviate1138]

I wonder if this creep will surface again?

"Sting joins High Court battle to ground 'noisy' RAF tankers
By Richard Savill 12:00AM GMT 17 Nov 2000
THE rock star Sting has joined forces with residents including the Earl of Chichester in a legal action to halt plans by the Ministry of Defence to house the new generation of RAF tanker aircraft near their homes.
Aircraft movements into and out of Boscombe Down, Wiltshire, would increase by more than a third and cause a high level of noise pollution if the plans go ahead, they believe. Eight objectors, also including Sting's actress wife Trudie Styler and the Countess of Iveagh, are seeking a judicial review in the High Court, claiming that the procedures involved in the MoD plan infringe the European Convention on Human Rights.
Sting, a keen environmentalist who has campaigned actively for the protection of the Amazon rainforest, has a Grade 1 listed Tudor manor house at Wilsford-cum-Lake, about a mile from the Boscombe base. He was reported to have paid £2 million for the house, which includes 52 acres of landscaped gardens, in 1992."

:rolleyes:

[bvcu]

hasnt stopped them flying in and out in an exec jet in the past ..........

[Human Factor]

Max altitude: 0ft

About the same as the Tristar, isn't it? :E

[sycamore]

T-OT-D,perhaps you hadn`t noticed ,but 411A has gone to convert St Peter to Tristars.....:sad:

[Samuel]

I've worked on commissioning large industrial plant

There are better informed people than I around here, but I can make one very pertinant observation on this comment and that is: "Large industrial plant" tends not to be flown in all weathers! Nor does it have the ability to refuel other aircraft in flight!

I would also suggest that SOPs for a MILITARY aircraft cannot be accurately written until you fly it!

[Billby41]

Where are the Australian KC30A's? They seem to have gone off the radar!

[twochai]

spotting manhole covers

Sorry, but for the sake of correctness should we not be talking about 'person hole' covers?

[Trackmaster]

The RAAF KC30s are still on the ground in Spain while certification issues are sorted out.
The Australian Defence Department says the Spanish Military Certification Authority is making changes to the boom system and operational procedures following the accident in January when the boom detached during the refuelling of a Spanish F-16.
There are varying reports on when the aircraft will arrive at Amberley...some are saying delivery in July and others late this year.
Meanwhile, the fourth aircraft is still under conversion in the QANTAS hangar at Brisbane airport.

[Two_Squirrels]

cessnapete says:

Tend to agree, this is basically a mature airliner with thousands of hours airline service. Hanging a couple of pods under the wings can make little change to aerodynamics and presumably the manufacturer will have all the performance figures from the months of testing carried out at Seville by Airbus.
The similar Australian A330 figures are also available.
Can't see why six + more months required at Boscombe to get it into service.
Crew training doesnt take long these days and there is already an A330 Tanker sim up and running.

(With u/s TriStars littered around the routes at the moment and ongoing maintenance issues, the A330 can't be in service soon enough!!)

There is a lot more to testing of aircraft than just the aerodynamics. Firstly there is the integration of the refuelling equipment (which is more than just a couple of pods), and associated testing of the equipemnt both on the ground, and in the air. The aircraft will also no doubt have some sort of military equipment that does not feature on a normal airliner, e.g. air to air TACAN and Defensive Aids. Finally there is the not inconsiderable work required to test the AAR in the air with different aircraft types to assess the best refuelling envelopes, and also the testing if the Voyager itself as a receiver. Then there are the EMC (Electromagnatic Compatability) issues, as the EMC environment for a military aircraft is less benign than that for a civil aircraft. The list goes on.

[thunderbird7]

Does the autoland system work? :rolleyes:

[Art Field]

Two Squirrels

Sadly one task Boscombe will not have to do is to test its airborne refuel capability as it will not have a probe. As to the performance with its various receivers I trust that AAR experienced aircrew are involved, I have experience of previous Tanker types and the resulting muddled restrictions imposed by the lack of same.

[Yellow Sun]

Does the autoland system work?

Vicious!:E

YS

[Cows getting bigger]

I think the previous autoland system worked fine, as long as you didn't count the crew as part of the system. :)

[TheChitterneFlyer]

GIATT and cessnapete,

Clearly, neither of you understand the process of Test & Evaluation (T&E) and the need to explore the flight envelope of reciever aircraft i.e. Typhoon, Tornado and, the C-130J, behind the FSTA (Voyager).

Voyager will require the installation of test instrumentation prior to the air to air refuelling test-points; hence, the delivery to Boscombe to carry out that process.

Those series of tests should be complete by mid October/November and that Voyager will then be put into service at Brize Norton. The flying-reports for the reciever aircraft will then be analysed and given the neccessary Release to Service for operational use.

The reasons for doing so are quite simple... the first time that a Squadron Typhoon pilot plugs his expensive aeroplane into the refuelling basket of Voyager isn't the time or the place to discover a major problem with the transfer of fuel... especially if the jet is en-route to Libya or the Falkland Islands and that there's nowhere else to go!

If the said pilot then had to ditch his aeroplane into the sea, how would you then feel about how the Government spent your taxes without first ensuring that the refuelling system actually works?

Your comparison of the commissioning of large industrial plant to the flight testing of multi billion dollar aircraft systems doesn't make any sense... whatsoever!

TCF

[TheChitterneFlyer]

I think the previous autoland system worked fine, as long as you didn't count the crew as part of the system.


Well spoken... the TriStar Autoland System worked a treat, it was unfortunate that the chap who was attempting to demonstrate the system didn't fully understand the "pre-capture" requirements... resulting in severe damage to the aeroplane (a broken wing-spar).

411A (RIP) had much to say about that particular incident... and he was right!

TCF

[BEagle]

TCF, the audio transcript of the CVR was pretty interesting too....:eek:

A new multi-role aircraft might be cleared for one role, whilst work continues to clear it for another role. For example TypHoon was cleared for the air-to-air role whilst work continued on its air-to-mud/sand role.

But when an aircraft is actually owned by someone else, should the manufacturer have been unable to deliver to the contractor fully everything which was specified, things become rather more complicated as regards payment for use by the contractor's intended end-user.....:\

In such a case, "We'll go with what we've got" simply wouldn't be acceptable, I imagine!

[fantom]

Anyway, notwithstanding all the above, you should be falling over each other to get your hands on it; the 330 is easily the most wonderful civil aircraft I have flown.

Plus, also, as well, your CVs will look great if P45s start to appear...

[Wessex Boy]

Read 'Vulcan Test Pilot' by Tony Blackman, it goes into some of the differences between the test flying done by steely-eyed manufacturer's Test Pilots and the test flying conducted at Boscombe to ensure that it can be operated safely in-service

[Neptunus Rex]

at least he would get a dinghy drill out of it.Not necessarily. Back in Nimrod days, I was told by the sqadron stats officer that my crew was short of one practice Lindholme (Air Sea Rescue Apparatus) drop. I pointed out that we had carried out two live drops on a rescue mission the previous week. Apparently that didn't count, he wanted us to do a practice, dropping smoke floats. Unbelievable.

I just noticed that this is my post #777, so I shall add that with 3,000 hours on the A330, I know that the RAF crews will be absolutely delighted with their new Voyagers.

[Willard Whyte]

I know that the RAF crews will be absolutely delighted with their new Voyagers.

Particularly if they get a type rating out of a tour or two.

[Wander00]

TCF - was that the one (early '86) that flew a circuit leaking about 8,000lb of fuel. I was in the Falklands at the time, and light blue had to adopt a very low profile as the army had some guys who were pretty upset at having a few days extra on the chuff chart.

[NutLoose]

TCF - was that the one (early '86) that flew a circuit leaking about 8,000lb of fuel. I was in the Falklands at the time, and light blue had to adopt a very low profile as the army had some guys who were pretty upset at having a few days extra on the chuff chart. I was standing on the line watching it stagger around the circuit trailing fuel, half expecting it to break up at any moment..... And thankfully, I haven't seen anything come that close since... The guys that came over from Lockheed just stood there open mouthed at the sight of it and could not believe it flew.

Wasn't the first impact the gear and the second one shortly afterwards his posting hitting the desk :E

Still, anyone remember the BA Eng Hyd CB finger problem and the resulting explosion that "opened a few panels" ;)

[BEagle]

Yes I do. The aeroplane sat there for weeks being repaired....:sad:

I understand that, after the TriStar autoland 'event', it was found to have had another, unrecorded heavy landing during its previous ownership? I saw the photos of the incident aircraft's main spar and they were very, very lucky to have survived. As was the welder in Witney's industrial estate who, on realising it was raining AvTur, wisely decided to turn off his torch....:eek:

Another time in 1984 I was chatting to a TriStar chum over tea in the OM (yes, it was still quite civilised in those days) when we heard the distant sound of a TriStar doing engine runs. The noise increased, followed by a thunderous surge and silence. It seems that the boffins were doing some IR measurements prior to fitting IRCM to a ba jet which was due to fly HMtheQ to Jordan...and they didn't realise that you can't just park the thrust levers at maximium in a TriStar willy-nilly. I'm not sure who paid for the subsequent engine change.

The antics of twenty-one and sixpence kept us quite amused back then!

[Saintsman]

Yes I do. The aeroplane sat there for weeks being repaired....

Weeks? It was repaired over the winter months in Base Hangar and as the hangar doors had to be open for the Tristar to fit, it switched the heating off.

Bloody freezing it was.

As for Boscombe Down, well all new aircraft have to go there don't they?

Whether they need to or not because that's the way it's always been....

[RumPunch]

I hope the aircraft does not have to go through the MAA, as its a civvy aircraft I assume its exempt all the usual crap MRA4 went through.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

"As for Boscombe Down, well all new aircraft have to go there don't they?"

I don't recall the C-17 spending much time at Boscombe Down, and unless things have changed recently, the Airseeker team don't plan on the RC-135 spending time there either.

[TheChitterneFlyer]

NutLoose,

Still, anyone remember the BA Eng Hyd CB finger problem and the resulting explosion that "opened a few panels"

Yeah, I do, indeed, recall the resident BA Engineer "holding-in" the CB for the Standby Hydraulic Pump and the ensuing fire that caused so much damage to the hydraulic compartment.

It's my hope that the introduction to service of Voyager won't see any of the "cowboy" attitudes that were once attributed to the early TriStar aircrew. To be fair, it was only the misguided attitude of one or two that tainted the early days of the TriStar. It was a superb aircraft; it still is, and, that the guys who now operate the type are doing a superb job.

Back to the thread... Voyager will be fit for purpose; however, there will be many ongoing discussions about the "contractual" costs of how this aeroplane was financed... via a consortium of international bankers! The "finer details" are all wrapped-up in legalese; it's, perhaps, suffice to say that the contract was signed-up by the MoD... a bunch of guys who aren't as "bussiness savvy" as those who are involved with international banking... do you believe that we got a good deal? I somehow doubt it!

Comments invited.

TCF

Edit

AirSeeker has a track record; as did the C-17; hence, why would there be any requirement for any further T&E for an aircraft that has a proven track record?

Voyager is a "first"... the platform has to be proven.

[GIATT]

Your comparison of the commissioning of large industrial plant to the flight testing of multi billion dollar aircraft systems doesn't make any sense... whatsoever!

I won't take the thread off on a tangent, but the various replies have done much to enlighten me, particularly Two_Squirrels. Many large industrial plants are hideously complicated, incorporate many untested systems, and are fabulously expensive. When they go wrong they tend to do it in rather unpleasant and often massively fatal ways, so not a worthless comparison.

My post was to question the apparent concept that the aircraft would be built and then some brave chaps would take it up for a spin to see how, or if, it worked. My question has been answered.

Let's leave it at that.

[Jig Peter]

If I remember aright, the civil Airbus range of products were all delivered to their first operator(s) within one year from first flight, with all their internal passenger care equipment functioning from day one. That's why I find the Boscombe schedule "relaxed".
One contributor finds that there's no comparison between checking out an aircraft variant and delivering a fully-functioning factory or industrial installation, but anyone involved in the whole process of getting an airliner "off the drawing board" and into service will tell you it's also an industrial process - there has to be a lot of concurrent activity, with production lines to be built and equipped, for example.
Apart from the refuelling pods, there are also quite a few excrescences on the "Voyager" which has gone to Boscombe (OK, there's also a spacecraft of that name, so should the RAF's craft not have a "III" suffix rather than the "II" I suggested?), so is it now up to people at Boscombe to do the wiring up, if the kit's so special that UK Eyes Only applies?
And, once again, how long will it take for Cobham to spool up?
TriStar replacement has been urgent for ages - so isn't the current arrangement a bit of "pie in the sky" - "You'll get this shiny new aeroplane chaps - we've got a wizard wheeze to make it look as if it's not costing anything, but it's still going to take time" ...

[NutLoose]

There probably following the Tristar book of words for taking on a new transport aircraft and are beavering away at Boscombe removing all the in flight entertainment equipment so they can refit it all at a later date. :p

What amazes me, this time they appear to have settled on a single variant of the type... where is the fun in that? :p

[NutLoose]

Quote:
Yes I do. The aeroplane sat there for weeks being repaired....
Weeks? It was repaired over the winter months in Base Hangar and as the hangar doors had to be open for the Tristar to fit, it switched the heating off.

Bloody freezing it was.

As for Boscombe Down, well all new aircraft have to go there don't they?

Whether they need to or not because that's the way it's always been....

Saintsman, we were refering to the Hyd one which was repaired on the apron with a poly sheeting tent thrown over the wings and ground heaters blowing into it.

[moggiee]

The antics of twenty-one and sixpence kept us quite amused back then!
As a 10 Sqn man we used to look forward to the "weekly 216 cockup" report.

Busted main spar, taxying collisions, running one tank dry whilst feeding all 3 engines off it etc. etc.

[NutLoose]

Let's not forget,

wheel rim fell off main wheel on taxi....

Air Eng on exercise after sitting in seat on a none running aircraft for 2 hours as part of exercise looking at instruments glass six inches in front of him from his nose, tech logs them for being dusty!! :ugh:

Ahh and the dreaded practice airshow at Brize when they cocked up their centre line and tried to correct it....... never ever seen vortices streaming off and compression shockwaves forming on an airliner wing before..... Admitted G loading was to be polite on the low side....

Snagging engines for not relighting at 20 million plus feet.... on pointing out that it is above what Rolls Royce say they will relight at, getting the answer, but the others did. :ugh:

That'll be 10 Sqn..... :E

I won't mention the 10 on the Detuner spitting its IGV's and a lot more out of the back end though, As I was ermmm in it. Talk about shake rattle and roll, it did all three, including catching fire and seizing,

On approaching the fireman in his engine out front after we got it all shut down, Did he see the fire? :}............. Fire??? What Fire??? are you telling me I have been a Fireman 18 years and when I finally have a real Aircraft fire I miss it? :D :p

[mikip]

What happens when the Airtanker consortium goes bust because it cannot afford to pay the extortinate interest being charged on the umpteen billion it borrowed from the Greedy/generous banks? are all the voyagers impounded leaving the RAF with no refuelling capability or are the (t)rusty old tristars and VC10s wheeled out of mothballs again?

[Helen49]

I have to disagree with some of the earlier posts. Rather than mocking those who 'commission large industrial plant and machinery', perhaps the RAF could learn a lot from them.

Frequently there are significant safety issues affecting installation, operation and quality of product. Management of the change process can be extremely complex with regard to training, maintenance, keeping the show on the road etc. Time is normally of the essence for a whole range of reasons, not least because there is always a finite budget within which manufacturers and purchasers of such industrial plant are required to operate.

In the commercial world they have to know that plant and machinery does what it says on the tin [nothing signed up until such surety exists]. that the specification will not continue to change during manufacture and installation; that the price will not escalate beyond imagination during the process by virtue of the manufacturer writing its own cheques etc!

In the commercial world the management are accountable to the shareholders for business efficiency. In the RAF the management are here today and gone tomorrow [as Robin Day once said to John Nott] and the politicians, as well as being here today and gone tomorrow, haven't got a clue how to ensure that the shareholders get value for money.

Yes safety is of paramount importance in aviation but aviation aint all that unique in these respects!

[TheChitterneFlyer]

I have to disagree with some of the earlier posts. Rather than mocking those who 'commission large industrial plant and machinery', perhaps the RAF could learn a lot from them.


I take you point; however, the assumption was being made that the RAF guys at Boscombe would now take-over the Flight Testing of Voyager... not so... the continuing flight trials are being conducted by Airbus Military as part of their own flight test programme. It just so happens that Boscombe has a significant EMC test facility for Airbus Military, and, that it's more convenient for Voyager to be temporarily based at Boscombe (with Airbus technicians in attendance) than taking the various recievers over to France/Spain.

Quote:
To allow the RAF to write the operating manual and work out the best way to use it and also the limitations on it in service.
Why was that not being done at the same time the plane was being built? I've worked on commissioning large industrial plant and we had to have the SOPs, operations manuals, and all the staff trained ready for the day after the various contractors walked out.


The operating manuals aren't being rewritten for Voyager; but for the various recievers that are already in-service. Hence, the comparing of the testing of large industrial plant to the flight testing of Voyager becomes a significant anomoly; how would you accurately assess/predict how both would perform whilst within the design and planning stage?

Thus, as Helen49 says, this will ensure that it does what it says on the tin.

TCF

[Two_Squirrels]

Can I also point out that QinetiQ and the RAF, (i.e. the Aircraft Test and Evaluation Collaboration, ATEC) are involve in the testing of the aircraft via a Combined Test Team with Airbus and Cobham (And probably others). It isn't just the 'RAF', nor is it just 'Airbus' conducting testing. And also, that tetsing is not just carried out by 'test pilots'.

[NutLoose]

Why did they bother naming them at all?

Well you need something to put on the cloth badges :p


I have to disagree with some of the earlier posts. Rather than mocking those who 'commission large industrial plant and machinery', perhaps the RAF could learn a lot from them.

If anything they could learn from Civi street, it is to fly them for 5 years till the warranty expires then chop them in for replacements, as per Ryanair etc, the price of maintenance goes up significantly after that period.... of course they won't and will fly them well past their sell buy date.. it reduces costs, holds their resale value and keeps the fleet young.

BTW a European airline I think were suprised at the amount of corrosion they were finding in some of theirs at the first big check.

[Global Ops]

Interesting discussion here - the project's going well, but there's still a huge amount to do:ooh:

As well as getting voyager ready to operate with RAF platforms, there is also aircraft certification to achieve, which will be challenging for the first of type aircraft - the 2 point and 3 point variants. I think these are the primary reasons the aircraft will be at Boscombe for the Summer and Autumn.

It is also worth remembering that AirTanker Services has huge challenges ahead as an airline start-up. As well as achieving civilian ops and eng regulatory approvals, the company has got to recruit, train and (probably most importantly) retain flight crew, engineering and ground ops personnel in competition with the likes of Virgin (10 x A330 inbound) and a potentially strengthening industry. Finally, integrating a new airline into the RAF's legacy operations at Brize and elsewhere will be no mean feat.

[Tallsar]

Good succinct Input GO.....many don't grasp the significant new challenges that the FSTA programme has brought with it way beyond those already implicit in learning to use a shiney new tanker/transport airframe.

[cyrilranch]

" the same aircraft type that isn't equipped with armour, antimissile systems and early warning kit"
I think you find that this kit has been/to be fitted to the first aircraft as seen by the various bit's added to the body of the aircraft when it landed at Boscombe Down.( look at the side of the nose and at tailend of the plane.)
Besides I think it is in AirTanker interest that these plane return to base safely.

FighterControl • Home to the Military Aviation Enthusiast • View topic - 18-4-11 Boscombe Down FSTA/MRTT Arrival (http://www.fightercontrol.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=32623&sid=aa634a9546b1e3007c2df56e7494022d)

[Global Ops]

Just for clarity, I understand that the programme has met all financial and completion milestones since financial close of the PFI contract in 2008. The entry to service is definitely later than originally planned and expected by the RAF; this is primarily due to the very long procurement activity leading up to contract award.

Also, FSTA is not yet fitted with cockpit armour, but will be capable of being fitted with defensive aids from aircraft 1. Both these facts have been reported in the media.

It will be interesting to watch progress going forward....

[cessnapete]

Surely what is required urgently now is the AT A330 pax version without all the tanker mods ,with DAS only, to carry out the Herick trooping.
Difficult at the moment with sometimes only a couple of Tristars serviceable out of the whole fleet

[opsjockey]

aircraft number 2 arrived at Boscombe Down this week (5th May??). Both sitting next to each other in the sun.

[D-IFF_ident]

Everything still attached?

[BEagle]

No booms on the UK's jets, mate!

(Still waiting to hear from you-know-who!)

[D-IFF_ident]

Are there any extra bits attached then?

(I'll give 'em a nudge)

[Peter Carter]

Talking 'bits' - I've been looking out of my window at Voyager for a couple of weeks now, and I still haven't seen Seven of Nine!