Harrier in civillian hands

[son of brommers]

Given that the UK (IMHO) missed a great opportunity to have a Bucc flying like they're doing in SA, what are the chances of getting a Harrier or 2 flying in a civillian capacity?

[John Farley]

I do love easy questions that I know the answer to.

None.

(If you don't believe me ask the CAA).

[FODPlod]

Reportedly, the only Harrier in private hands to date:
Nalls Aviation - Home of the Sea Harrier (http://www.nallsaviation.com/index.html)

[Trim Stab]

Presumably the RNHF could run one, if they could raise the budget?

[Top Bunk Tester]

No Buccs in SA any more


http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/426793-thunder-city-closed-down.html (Thunder City Closed)

[son of brommers]

The TC website is still live but only the front page. If they have shut down it is very sad but possibly understandable.

Back to the Harrier question, why does the UK CAA have such a seemingly negative stance on ex-mil jets operating, if the Yanks can do it why can't we? I'm sure that there is enough expertise and funding to keep a couple flying with the right sponsorship/support.

[NigelOnDraft]

Not disagreeing with JF, since what he says is the practical answer.

The theoretical answer would be based on CAP632 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP632.PDF) - see Ch4 and the Harrier for all sorts of reasons would be a "Complex" type. All* current UK ex-Mil Jets are 'Intermediate' (JPs, Hunters etc.). 'Complex' types have a high hurdle of engineering support, in principle equivalent to "manufacturers' support", in order to get a Permit to Fly.

NoD

* The Vulcan is an exception - there may be the odd other. A degree of the problems in operating the Vulcan are the costs and procedures involved in requiring MA as a design ? maint ? support? organisation.

[Spit161]

Such a shame, but Hey-ho. At least XH558 is still "alive" and well!

cheers,
Jake

[Two's in]

Not only reportedly FOD Plod, but actually. I saw it just this last weekend at the Pax River Air Expo, even with the Blue Angels and a bunch of other stuff, the Sea Harrier still drew much appreciation and applause from the crowd, many of whom have never seen vertical flight from a fast jet.

Purely anecdotal, but in keeping with PPrune, Art Nalls allegedly gets little if any support from BAE or RR for his plane on the grounds of commercial liability, so he has to beg, borrow and steal to keep it airworthy. Something intrinsically ironic in the fact the the FAA will allow a private ex-UK Harrier to operate in the US.

[FODPlod]

Thanks Two's in. Much appreciated. Perhaps you could post the odd photo sometime.

[Dr Jekyll]

Did G-VTOL count as civilian?

[Lima Juliet]

This little fella is in a "back garden" near RAF Croughton in Oxfordshire.

Sea Harrier...002 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tupperware_pilot/3801804910/)

:ok:

[Spit161]

Did G-VTOL count as civilian?

Yes. It was registered under G-VTOL and ZA250.

Jake.

[Mungo5]

Art Nalls allegedly gets little if any support from BAE or RR for his plane on the grounds of commercial liability, so he has to beg, borrow and steal to keep it airworthy. Something intrinsically ironic in the fact the the FAA will allow a private ex-UK Harrier to operate in the US.

Quite true.. when he bought it and had it shipped over he was fairly convinced the start sequencer was left out on purpose. Only by chance he had an ex-harrier mech on his team who knew it was missing, or at least where to look when it wouldn't crank.

[EAP86]

Twos in
"Purely anecdotal, but in keeping with PPRuNe, Art Nalls allegedly gets little if any support from BAE or RR for his plane on the grounds of commercial liability, so he has to beg, borrow and steal to keep it airworthy. Something intrinsically ironic in the fact the the FAA will allow a private ex-UK Harrier to operate in the US."

I don't think he ever asked BAE and I believe Rolls Royce rejected the request very rapidly. Bear in mind, the jet had a wheels-up on an early flight because they'd removed the emergency u/c lowering so RR's attitude might be justified. The US is a bigger place than the UK and there's plenty of space to lose the jet without landing on someone.

son of brommers
"Back to the Harrier question, why does the UK CAA have such a seemingly negative stance on ex-mil jets operating, if the Yanks can do it why can't we? I'm sure that there is enough expertise and funding to keep a couple flying with the right sponsorship/support."

The report on the South African Lightning might go a long way to explaining and even validating the CAA's stance. It won't be long before its issued.

[TEEEJ]

FODPlod,

Video of the Sea Harrier display from Pax River Air Expo, 2011.

2011 NAS Pax River Air Expo - Art Nall's Sea Harrier - YouTube

TJ

[Fortissimo]

I agree with John Farley (but who wouldn't...). I had this discussion with a CAA display supervisor some years ago re the Lightning and Phantom. His line was that the aircraft were too complex for 'normal people' to operate and, even though there were simulators etc, the range of emergencies put it into the too difficult category. The risk to the public of something going wrong at a display was therefore deemed to be too great.

[exmanman]

A question if I may,

The theoretical answer would be based on CAP632 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP632.PDF) - see Ch4 and the Harrier for all sorts of reasons would be a "Complex" type. All* current UK ex-Mil Jets are 'Intermediate' (JPs, Hunters etc.). 'Complex' types have a high hurdle of engineering support, in principle equivalent to "manufacturers' support", in order to get a Permit to Fly.

Would the Hawk T1 be classed as intermediate? I have often wondered if some may eventually be disposed of in a similar way to the Hunters in the eighties, mainly because I then might be able to fulfill a long held desire to fly in one (mortgage notwithstanding). :}

Don't tell the wife

Thank you.

[FODPlod]

Thanks TEEEJ. That's something I never expected to see again. He certainly puts on a good show, doesn't he?

[Phil_R]

Sorry, my snarkiness is overflowing. Let's see.

List of entities which cannot have Harrier:

- the Royal Navy
- the Royal Air Force

List of entities which can have Harrier:

- Some bloke.

Nrrrgh.

[DX Wombat]

There is, or maybe was by now as it was for sale, a Harrier in a farmyard in Queensbury, west Yorkshire.

[Two's in]

TEEEJ,

Thanks for the post of the Sea Harrier Display, all I can say is if you thought the mindless drone of the PA commentator was annoying for one display, you should have tried it for 2 whole days. The man was truly gifted in his ability to fill dead air with meaningless dribble - huge potential to be a poilitician or a senior officer.

[Lightning Mate]

was that the aircraft were too complex for 'normal people' to operate

Are you saying that I am not normal?

[John Farley]

Yes G-VTOL was originally certificated on the civilian register (it only had dual Mil/Civ later when the rules changed) and was given a CoA in the 'private' category with the restriction that it always had to be captained by a ministry approved Harrier pilot employed by HSA who had at least a PPL.

On a point of detail the VL when Art could not get the nose gear locked was its first flight and the emergency blow down was fitted but inop that sortie.

On another point of detail re LM's comment I don't know what he thought of himself but I certainly realised I was not 'norma' l after I asked to go to CFS from a Hunter Sqn in 1960.

[The Ancient Geek]

You will probably be able to buy an AV8B in a few years time when the USMC get their F35s and it might be possible to get support from Boeing.

OTOH you would almost certainly have to keep it N-registered in the experimental class which means keeping it in the USA.

Just about every american warbird has a few flying examples on the civilian register, they are a big attraction over there.

[Anonystude]

exmanman -- I wondered that one myself; I fear it'd be Complex as it's not got manual reversion for the flying controls, only hydraulics...

[GeeRam]

You will probably be able to buy an AV8B in a few years time when the USMC get their F35s and it might be possible to get support from Boeing.

OTOH you would almost certainly have to keep it N-registered in the experimental class which means keeping it in the USA.

Not much chance of getting an ex-US mil AV8B.

US Govt/Mil are making it VERY difficult to get more modern ex-mil jets on N-reg. Why do think Art Nalls has a ex-RN SHAR.
Even the Collings Foundation were recently thwarted in trying to aquire the last non-cut F-105 Thunderchief from Davis-Monthan as they didn't want it being returned to the air, despite CF's already successful operation of it's A4 and F4.

And further more, as of a couple of weeks ago, the FAA released a memo relating to regarding further restrictions on granting airworthiness certs for ex-mil jet aircraft.

[Rigga]

The issue about “Complex” types is directly about the experience of operators and/or maintenance staff and a perceived propensity to manage or complete aircraft maintenance with a “Can-Do” attitude instead of doing the right things.

This rule hopefully prevents anyone with ‘enough money’ endangering the public by ensuring that the maintenance and flight operations are properly managed and overseen by a properly qualified and responsible company, such as a fleet operator of a similar type, or the airframe manufacturer. See the Vulcan’s management team as an example.

Had the Concorde bid for heritage status gone ahead it too would’ve needed EADS sponsorship and design support.

I have operated an ex-military type on a UK Permit-to-Fly and it was sponsored by a large company (Bristow's) familiar with the type of aircraft on a mandated instruction from the CAA.

Under EASA all jet engined aircraft including helicopters are considered “complex”. Most military aircraft are also considered complex too, even if they are not (Bulldog), because of their high potential for unknown/undocumented/inaccurate flying and maintenance histories. Not much chance there for Hawks, I'm afraid.

I find it interesting that someone has decided the hawk is an “intermediate” when there is no grade for this? – Please prove me wrong.

Hunters/JPs are not considered complex due to their being in civil use for so long – more than 25 years in some cases – and they got Grandfather Rights by being in use (and now of a known quality) before the rules changed.

Under ITAR rules (unless I have it wrong again!) no private/commercial concern can obtain military jets that are still in service – hence the only Harrier out there is a Sea Harrier. And in the states it’s classed as “Experimental” so it’s flown on personal ownership in a limited capacity.

Hope this helps...

[Mandator]

Rigga: You have just blown your cover! The Bulldog is not deemed a 'complex' ex-military type. All Series and all Models of the Bulldog, including the ex-RAF T Mk 1 (designated the Series 120, Model 121), are civil-certificated as shown un UK CAA Type Certificate BA7. Their design and maintenance histories are known and they operate quite merrily just like any other certificated aircraft in the UK and elsewhere. In the US they are flown on the Experimental category because there is no FAA Type Certificate - no-one is prepared to take on the liability.

Now, if you had said, for example, Gazelle helicopter ....

[Anonystude]

Rigga, you're confusing the EASA definition of 'complex' with the CAP632 definition, where it refers to 'intermediate' type ex-military types (referred to above).

I hope the FAA allow someone to operate a fleet of Hawks in a similar manner to the 20-odd Tucanos someone shipped out there and refurbished...

[Lightning Mate]

John F,

On another point of detail re LM's comment I don't know what he thought of himself but I certainly realised I was not 'norma' l after I asked to go to CFS from a Hunter Sqn in 1960.

:D

Me too mate - and I did it from Lightnings!

[BEagle]

There was once a whisper about a civilian jet display team being formed to operate 4 x AV8s.

Then came September 11th.....

ENDEX ENDEX ENDEX

Re. Bulldogs, once the leaden hand of €urocracy has inflicted itself upon us, it will still be possible to fly a Bulldog on and old-style UK PPL, to obtain an IMC rating on it and you won't need an aerobatic rating either!

So a nice Bulldog in good nick should be worth its weight in gold soon...:ok: Same goes for a Chipmunk or Tiger Moth. Or Harvard!

[andyl999]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v616/andyl999/flying/harrier.jpg

[Fortissimo]

LM, I wasn't throwing stones, just using the words of the chap I was talking to. When pushed, he said he really meant non-military (trained) pilots but that there would still be an issue of currency that would be hard to overcome. How that works with a beast like the Sea Vixen is anyone's guess.

[grandfer]

It is possible to operate fairly modern jet types in civilian hands . Take the Breitling Jet Team for instance , I believe Breitling is itself based in Switzerland while the team is based in France flying Estonian registered L-39C Albatros aircraft .:ok::confused::confused:

[Lightning Mate]

Fortissimo,


LM, I wasn't throwing stones.......

I didn't for one minute think you were. :)

[Lightning Mate]

post #33...

andyl999,

That's the most interesting Harrier I have ever seen!

[Wrathmonk]

Tyre is flat too .....

[andyl999]

But just testing

How about the fin on the right?

[andyl999]

10 points but what about this vectored the camera slightly right?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v616/andyl999/flying/harrier2.jpg

[Wookey]

Wow, what a toy box !! Jag, Harrier,(whats the other aircraft facing the Jag?) Racing bikes, Footwork Arrows F1. I do hope the missiles are dummies !!

[John Farley]

Sorry chaps but I boobed - Arts hyd problem was on flight 2 not 1.

[TEEEJ]

Wookey wrote,

...whats the other aircraft facing the Jag?

Another Jaguar. Only the nose section and painted in Desert Pink.

Euro Demobbed - Out of Service Military Aircraft in Europe (http://www.eurodemobbed.org.uk/locations.php?location=4274)

FODPlod wrote

Thanks TEEEJ

Two's in wrote

Thanks for the post of the Sea Harrier Display

No problem. It certainly is a nice display.

TJ

[Lightning Mate]

.....and annuver fing....

The Jaguar right outboard pylon is carrying what looks like a SNEB pod.

I flew this aeroplane for almost eight years and to the best of my knowledge this weapon was not a Jaguar fit.

Mind you, my two remaining brain cells cause the brain to run at idle rpm.

[cornish-stormrider]

And thats because WEAPONS were not a Jag fit at all.

You were lucky that it was allowed to be fitted with fuel.
gutless show pony that it was.

[Lightning Mate]

Got much time on it then have you? :)

[Molemot]

Culled from the Hawker Association...

Sea Harrier Spares
Art Nialls who is going to fly Sea Harrier XZ439 on the US air show circuit wonders if anyone has any suitable spares hiding in tool boxes or desk drawers. If you have please e-mail him.

[TEEEJ]

Lightning Mate,

As you say perhaps not an RAF operational fit, but the Jaguars at Cranwell have been noted carrying them.

Image link from 2008.

Jaguar XZ358 9262M L « SEPECAT Jaguar in detail (http://sepecat.info/b/2008/04/30/jaguar-xz358-9262m-l-cranwell/)

Image link from 2009

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f375/denolli/XX837ZCAP.jpg

TJ