Was it really fright(e)ning?

[tartare]

Have always admired the F3.
Looks like something out of Thunderbirds - all that polished aluminium (the earlier ones anyway) and a planform like a steel dart.
But did it really deserve it's nickname from a pilot's point of view?
I remember reading somewhere that some of the Saudi pilots were literally too scared to fly the thing.
Any former drivers with stories to tell?

[Jayand]

Is this a wah?
The nickname frightening was given to the Lightening not the F3.

[Courtney Mil]

I think he meant the Lightning F3, not the later, far superior fighter. :E

[ORAC]

Marks of Lightning last in service in the UK were the F3, F6 and T5.

[BEagle]

I think he meant the Lightning F3, not the later, far superior fighter.

Fighter? Interceptor, surely?

[Heathrow Harry]

the problem was that the spec was written by people who had been bounced too often from altitude in WW2 - they were never going to be caught like that again

the fact it carried far too little fuel was never thought important

personally I was amazed at how they managed to scab on so much extra capacity over the years to fix a basic design flaw

[Fareastdriver]

I always thought that the Lightning started off as a P1, a research vehicle. Because the cock-ups of the British aircraft industry and the Whithall that controlled it the RAF found itself without a supersonic fighter project. The Fairey FD2 would have been the best, the Bristol 188 the worst but Canberra production was going to tail off so the P1/Lightning was botched up to fill the slot.

Despite all this it still managed to have an illustrious career. The last of the sports cars.

[Courtney Mil]

Of course. Interceptor. Sorry.

[soddim]

I think few posters here realise that the Lightning led the world in performance at the time of first production. Yes, it was a prototype and only little developed but it out-performed just about every other fighter in its day.

In its later development models the shortage of fuel was not such a critical issue for point defence but it never got either a state of the art radar or a good missile nor did it carry enough of them.

Just to put its qualities into perspective, the RAF did not get a fighter that could match either its rate of climb or its' service ceiling until Typhoon appeared some 40-odd years later. Nor did they get anything else so shiny!

[ORAC]

Don't knock the Firestreak and Redtop, for their era they were good missiles.

p.s. I have a large scale (about 18" x 12", I think) photo of the last ever Redtop firing if there are any WIWOLs out there interested. It's been sitting inside it's envelope since I got it over 20 years ago, so it might as well go to a good home.

p.p.s. I've a got a smaller framed copy on my wall, so I'm not losing all my memories.....

[Union Jack]

Where's BEag ..... Sorry, Lightning Mate, when you need him?

Jack

[Fitter2]

Having watched self-styled steely eyed 226 OCU sudents fresh from Valley & Brawdy stagger white and trembling into the line hut after their first ride in a T4 (instructor jolly trip), and blagged 1 trip in a T5 ('sorry sir, can't reproduce the symptoms and need to diagnose in flight') I can confirm it was impressive.

[safetypee]

The Lightning was designed and built for purpose – point defence in a nuclear war.
Quick reaction, rapid climb, fast, all weather, autonomous operation if required, ECM tollerant radar ~ era, missiles with a high kill rate.
Its long service life indicated some success in adaptation, limited more by politics than the willingness to develop it.

A photo which I took earlier:- Firestreak vs Jindivik FL480

http://i46.tinypic.com/2e2phxt.jpg

Not Frightening – Fantastic !

[BEagle]

What an excellent photo!

I did hear that there was once a proposal to fit rocket packs into the F1's ventral to give it an ability to reach around FL 900 in a point defence climb against aircraft such as the Myasishchev M-50 Bounder!

"Just what we need - less fuel and a greater rate of climb!", quoth one wag.

[BOAC]

Was it really fright(e)ning? it had its momentsI remember reading somewhere that some of the Saudi pilots were literally too scared to fly the thing. - to add to the list of Marques, the Saudis were F53 and F56.
Any former drivers with stories to tell? - yes, and err, no!

[Fitter2]

I remember reading somewhere that some of the Saudi pilots were literally too scared to fly the thing.



I think it more accurate (although Lightning Mate may have a different perspective) that the instructors had more difficulty convincing themselves that the Saudi students were capable of soloing.

And every Saudi 1st T55 solo was followed by a humungous party. They don't, of course, indulge in alcohol themselves; as one explained 'we are so religious that should alcohol touch our lips it immediately turns into water'.

[langleybaston]

An earth-bound met-muppet, I found the two Lightning Squadrons [19 and 92] at Guetersloh absolutely awe-inspiring.

As a visiting USAF senior officer said, watching a two-ship vertical climb-out

"J E ..........S U S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pontius Navigator]

I believe the Lightning even had a data link where the ground controller could control the intercept via the link rather than R/T. We were target on one occasion where the link was down but the controller gave the computer directions by voice.

It was quite instructive: heading such, flight level such, accelerate to Mach 1.6 now, turn to deg now, climb now etc. As we were non-manoeuvring it went like clockwork but I don't if it ever became fully operational.

I also remember one exercise where our OC Admin, a Navigator, got a ride in a T-bird (T4) and spent some hours on the ORP at Binbrook listening to the Telebrief - "Raids Imminent" - all the while watching bombers stream through the overhead. No doubt they had been splashed by fighter or SAM.

Finally they were scrambled against a target and went to Fl400 where they identified a civair in the Blue Way. Just 40 miles from base they were Bingo and RTB.

[just another jocky]

Was due to get a T-bird ride with a mate I went through training with, but on the day it went u/s so I had a trip in the simulator instead. Managed FL930 before it flamed out and was doing Mach 2 in the descent with no engines. I thought that quite impressive! :E

[ORAC]

I believe the Lightning even had a data link where the ground controller could control the intercept via the link rather than R/T. We were target on one occasion where the link was down but the controller gave the computer directions by voice. Yes, SLEWC and the Lightning had a data link mode, but it was never operationally used.

The software was still in use in 1975 when I was at Neatishead, but very rarely used. It need 2 controllers to do 4 simultaneous intercepts, whilst a single controller could easily do two; the software was so bad that that for a high speed target the software told you to go to M2 in the the opposite direction to get a 90nm separation before turning back towards the target - which you ignored and flew the "blip" to end up under the commanded position at the final turn.

[soddim]

Was that called 'Fire Brigade' ORAC ? - I dimly remember that from a visit to Patrington circa 1964 before we moved from Leconfield to Gutersloh.

[NutLoose]

I think he meant the Lightning F3, not the later, far superior fighter.


Jack of all, master of none springs to mind. :E


I remember an article a while ago, where I think they were Meatboxes practicing a display at about 20,000 feet and had first called up to ask if there was any traffic in the area to be told there was some slow moving traffic at low level, they proceeded into a loop to be suprised by the slow moving traffic over the ground that was actually fast moving traffic in the vertical in the shape of a Lightning that passed through their formation.

Rumour has it the only reason the lightning burnt fuel so fast, was that it leaked so fast, so you had to burn the stuff before it ran out.


Best looking British interceptor by far...

[safetypee]

“… the Lightning had a data link mode, but it was never operationally used.”
The nearest to this were the ground based computerized attack profiles 525/625 IIRC. Not very fuel efficient and based around really helpful info such as time to intercept; – couldn’t see the clock when looking in the B scope!

In addition to leading the world in performance, the radar and missile systems were world class. Considering that the radar depended on valve technology and clockwork computers, the guidance solutions were commendable.
With Red Top, the computer upgrade included kinematic ranging for ‘ECM’ head-on attacks (angle rate bombing in the US, who believed that they invented it); not all versions had that module.
The Firestreak guidance was first rate; stories of the technology being hijacked during a US visit? Also the fuse system was very clever in computing time after passing the jet pipe to abeam the cockpit; 60 lb Mills Bomb warhead. Red Top was similarly clever with fuse options for all-aspect launches; expanding ring warhead which ‘sawed’ the target in two. As one Farnborough boffin explained, you have to ‘kill’ a nuclear bomber within 15 sec.

Perhaps the most significant aspect was that the Lightning Air Defense force had the right people – Pilots, Engineers, Operations, and GCI radar. It was a complete and credible system.

[tartare]

Yes - my humble apologies - I did mean this:

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/englishelectriclightning/images/20181/english-electric-lightning-p1b.jpg

...which I'd always thought was the frightening - due to sheer power...
and not this:

http://johnnycat.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/p38-lightning.jpg

most certainly not this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/CF-1_flight_test.jpg/300px-CF-1_flight_test.jpg

Interested to hear how it handled.
Aside from reaching bingo very quickly - did it have any vices, or was there just so much power available that it didn't really matter..?

[BOAC]

did it have any vices- handling-wise it was a triumph of British aircraft design. The only real 'handling change' as you went supersonic was a brief hesitation on the Mach tape and a slight pitch down. Providing you observed the 'rules' for a highly-wept wing and kept the yaw as near zero as you could with rudder, it was 'docile' at all speeds. The Mk6 in particular with the extended L Edge was particularly good. I had my share of 'incipient spin' type manoeuvres in combat, but recovery was pretty well instantaneous. Decelerating through M1 in a tight turn could produce an unwelcome surge in g but that was an exercise covered at the OCU. Tanking was a little difficult to get to grips with at first since you could not watch the probe into the basket, and several friends accordingly tried to refuel their Firestreaks and RedTops.

Asymmetric was a breeze, and supersonic in level flight too:) As said, a brilliant design, and with tanker support a worthy air defence machine, if limited in weaponry.

[Union Jack]

Tanking was a little difficult to get to grips with at first since you could not watch the probe into the basket, and several friends accordingly tried to refuel their Firestreaks and RedTops.:D:D:D

Jack

[ORAC]

Soddim, thread from 2006 (http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/205755-anyone-remember-lightning-datalink.html).

[Fareastdriver]

Me and my Valiant was trundling around the racetrack in the early sixties with two Lightnings when they were first starting refuelling training. The No1 came in, did his dry contacts and then took some fuel to keep him going whilst he waited for his No2 to do the same thing.
We waited for him to engage. The nav radar, who had the refuelling kit was reporting nothing. Eventually the silence was broken.

"You're not going to believe this. I've brought up an aircraft without a probe."

Two Lightnings rapidly exited stage right for Wattisham.

What had happened was that the Squadron was in the middle of the probe mod program. The No2 has been issued with a probe aircraft but this had gone US on startup. He had rushed into the line hut, 'Givvussanotherone, chief' and then had got into a pre-mod aircraft. He should have known when he didn't bang his head on the probe getting in.

On the last ever Valiant/Lightning refuelling and also the last Valiant tanker flight, (me again) the Lightning from Leconfield had the droque come off the hose whilst he was engaged. The droque had all the valves in so an open pipe pumped fuel at 5000lbs/min into his intake. This put at least one engine out and again two Lightnings exited stage right in a hurry. The one with the droque on his port wing apparantly had considerable difficulty landing the aircraft back at base, in the dark.

[Pontius Navigator]

FED, I remember one tale, apocryphal?, of a pair being tanked to the Med by a Valiant. After one bracket over France the pair apparently peeled off for a closer look at a big lake with a huge fountain in it.

They then asked the Tanker what it was and came back for an unscheduled top up.

I think I heard that on the AAR (IFR - went it didn't relate to IMC) course, probably as a caution to follow the plan to the letter.

[noprobs]

I observed some interesting Lightning handling qualities from a different cockpit. During a Lightning weapons instructors course, I took a Harrier GR3 to Binbrook to fly some DACT against the students. The brief was that I was to take off first and head off out over the north sea. When I called ready, the first Lightning would come out and fly a 1v1, then when he had finished, we would reset and a second would do the same. I should have taken the hint as to what this would mean about the fuel loads of the aircraft.

When I was ready, the first Lightning came up, flashed past me at high speed a couple of times, and claimed a fully justified kill. He returned to Binbrook after about 5 minutes. Having learned a little from that first encounter, I jettisoned some fuel to increase manoeuvrability before the second opponent arrived. I started turning hard after the first pass, and quickly suckered him into a low speed fight that soon led to a level scissors in which I was getting the better position. On the next cross, I saw him apparently doing the sensible thing, getting ready to bug out as his nose sliced down away from me. However, as I reversed, I saw his nose continuing to move in the same yawing motion, as he entered a spin. We still had plenty of height, he had a recoverable aircraft, and I had a jet in which I could change the thrust vector. So I moved the nozzles to the braking stop, pointed vertically down, and did my best to get the pipper on the rotating cockpit for the film. As expected, the spin duly stopped after a couple of turns, so I had an amusing film to take into the debrief. What was not expected was the immediate entry by the Lightning into a spin the other way. I called height warnings for the pilot, 10,000 ft being the minimum for a spinning ejection. After a long pause, the aircraft recovered, and all I heard was a quiet call of "I'm returning to base."
:eek:

I descended to low level and made my way back to Wittering as planned, landing with ample fuel. The debrief was by telephone, and the second pilot admitted to being quite low by the time he recovered full control.

It was interesting to see how quickly a funny situation can turn to disaster, but also reassuring to see that the Lightning was a aircraft that can be recovered from some extreme situations.

[ORAC]

What was not expected was the immediate entry by the Lightning into a spin the other way. I called height warnings for the pilot, 10,000 ft being the minimum for a spinning ejection. I can remember sitting at Staxton Wold on a Friday controlling a pair of F6 doing ACT, one of which was flown by "Porky" Pxxx.

All was quiet until a voice said: "OK Porky, recover it", followed about 10 seconds later by "Porky Eject, Eject, Eject".

About another 10 seconds later Porky replied, "I've got it. Staxton, XX RTB".

In the subsequent debrief it transpired they'd been doing a vertical scissors about around 10K when Porky went into a spin. The No 2 called the eject as soon as he saw the spin and the height - but Porky stayed with it and recovered it. On the day he said he pulled out at about 300ft, it went up with each retelling.

The 10K limit was, it would seem, based on an aircraft in a fully developed spin with an established high rate of descent.

Why did he stay with it? You tell me what goes through a fighter pilot's head in those circumstances.

[Al R]

Me and my Valiant was trundling around the racetrack in the early sixties with two Lightnings..

Was there always an tanking presence airborne? Or did tankers have their own QRA for whenever an Interceptor QRA was tasked?

[Fitter2]

Considering that the radar depended on valve technology and clockwork computers, the guidance solutions were commendable.
Actually, mostly magnetic amplifiers. Rugged solid state before transistors existed. And amazing waveguide sculpture, a real work of art. If only the will and budget to develop it properly had existed.

[Pontius Navigator]

Al R, no, tanker presence was either pre-planned or ad hoc but never continuous.

Unlike the USAF that had 650 tankers and large numbers on QRA we never had that luxury.

[Fareastdriver]

I did a board of Inquiry at Tengah on a Lightning that had caught fire on the ground after startup. The cause was that an overwing vent valve had failed. When the engine started, the AC came on line, the ventral tank started feeding and the failed vent on the wing allowed the fuel to vent over the wing and the fuselage. Sods law says that if you pour enough fuel over a Lightning with an engine running it will catch fire; and so it did. The aircraft had a history of venting fuel. This I found out because being an ex tanker pilot I had a look at the detached Victor KC1's fuel logs which showed that this aircraft has taken disproportionately more fuel than the others.
Our recomendation to prevent a reoccurrence was to advise that the ventral tank should not be switched on until the take off point. This was accepted and put into place by the powers that be. It would be pertinant to point out that I, the other GD pilot, and the Engineering officer on the Board of Inquiry had no direct knowledge of Lightnings but we were General List GD and Engineering officers so therebye qualified. There was also no objection from the hierarchy of Tengah.
A few months later somebody gave his 8mm movie camera to a fellow pilot and asked him to film a double reheat take off with a vertical climb. The aircraft hurled down the runway, lifted off and at around 250knots was rotated into the climb. It G stalled, autorotated into a Kampong killing the pilot and one or two on the ground.
For the B of I it was easy; the had a film of the whole thing. It transpired, with Boscombe Down's help that with a full or nearly full ventral tank the aircraft's C of G was on or aft of the limit, something not experienced before because the ventral was a third empty by the time the wheels came off.

A little knowledge can be dangerous. The B of I, in retrospect, should have been carried out be Lightning friendly members. However, in this case there were no operational issues involved so anybody could do it.

Do I feel guilty? No; I had forgotton about it until now.

[Lyneham Lad]

The law of unintended consequences bites again. A sad tale indeed.

[BSweeper]

I recall a flight safety film regarding Lightning vertical pull ups after take off, based around an accident at Akrotiri (APC I presume). So how many accidents were there and when was it banned.

Typhoon at Warton is another story!

The Sweep.

[BEagle]

BSweeper, the FS movie Lightning accident was based on the Tengah accident.

If you look at the Skywatch movie, there is a good clip of the 2 Lightning F3s doing reheat rotation take-offs.

Rumour has it that a certain, thoroughly disliked ex-Lightning senior officer* tried to have a Tornado F3 mate court-martialled for exceeding the F3's release to service clearance after a porked-up "let's see how high it will go!" event. Until, that is, someone happened to mention that the reheat rotation was outside the Lightning release to service, so perhaps the example of certain former Lightning pilots might be raised by the defence... Whereupon the matter was dropped.





*Whose name, it is alleged, might have been 'Bill'.....:yuk:

[Ali Barber]

So far as I can recall, the rotation take-off was never banned as, without any AOA indication and at that speed, it was impossible to exceed any limits (other than fishtailing and crashing of course).

[endevol]

Aah, the Lightning. I spent about 9 years at Binbrook as a Flight Systems Technician, in AEEF, ASF and 5 Sqn. I even helped scrap the fleet and close the station down.

During that time we had, in no particular order:

F3 display pilot climbed in an F6, pulled a rote, managed to get the gear up before he realised he was in a 6 not a 3 and sank back onto the runway. He managed to get the thing airborne but left most of the ventral tank and some of the tailplane behind.

F3 display pilot practicing just outside the fence, pulled a negative G turn, stalled at about 2000 feet and banged out. I saw that one happen. I even got to guard the wreck. Lucky me.

F6 on APC in Akrotiri shot himself down. Very neat trick, I thought, took real skill to do that.

T5 gear collapsed on landing when the brakes were applied. Stopped just short of the fence to missile city. Could have been messy.

Forget the model, but one a/c on its first flight after a check 3 in ASF suffered a reheat pump fire and ended up at RAF Dogger Bank.

Another driver forgot to lock the canopy and discovered that, yes, the canopy can clear the tailplane at 90 knots.

Another driver in an F6 had a close encounter with the North Sea and ended up pulling an estimated 13½G pull up - that a/c spent the next 3 and-a-bit years in ASF getting straightened out. This was one a/c that never again went on APC - the guns couldn't be harmonised.

An F6 sans Avons being manouvered round the hangar with an electric tug ended up sat on its jet pipe with an electric tug dangling from the nose gear and a very embarrased radar sergeant hanging on for dear life.

An F6 jumping its chocks at Golf Dispersal at Akrotiri and legging it for the storm drains at the edge of the bondu. Well done to the liney who managed to get a chock in front of the nose wheel!

We lost 2 more in my time but the pilots didn't survive. One in a spin, the other in a CFIT.

Frightening? It scared the cr@p out of me!

[NutLoose]

F6 on APC in Akrotiri shot himself down. Very neat trick, I thought, took real skill to do that.


We had a Jag nearly do that, only a lot slower... so the rounds just grazed the canopy as they overtook it...

[tartare]

Wonderful stories guys.
An extraordinary aircraft.
Mike Hale's bouncing of a U2 at FL88 is still amazing... as is Brian Carroll reaching FL87 over Saudi.
I see Brian Carroll is no longer with us - does Mike Hale ever frequent these forums?

[BEagle]

Another driver in an F6 had a close encounter with the North Sea and ended up pulling an estimated 13½G pull up

Speaking to the mate involved, after he took his beak out of the boggle scope, he reckoned it was when he saw the OR946 attitude indicator showing nothing but black, with the nadir star right in the middle, followed by the Mach/ASI strip rapidly accelerating across the display, that he knew it was all about to go rather pear-shaped.....

After throttling back, all he could do was to PULL - and he was well over the IAS limit for airbrakes, so they were locked in... It went 'rather black'; when he woke up he was below 1000 ft in a shallow climb with the IAS rapidly decaying. He then sorted himself out, did a low speed handling check and flew back rather cautiously to Binbrook for an underwear change.

He told us that he had lace marks from his g-suit on his legs for days afterwards.

[tartare]

BEagle - you referred to Skywatch movie earlier.
Can't find reference on the web... could you point me in the right direction?

[longer ron]

Hi Tartare
Link to skywatch

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/491385-skywatch-video-bbc-21-6-1974-a.html

[bigglesbrother]

#42 Wonderful stories guys.
An extraordinary aircraft.
Mike Hale's bouncing of a U2 at FL88 is still amazing...



Wonderful & enjoyable stories they are. Great fun to reminisce.

I flew the Lightning Mk3 ...(the hotrod version of the Lightning with the greatest power to weight ratio).

I also flew the Lockheed U-2C ...(the hotrod version of the U-2 with the greatest power to weight ratio).

Sadly on this excellent aviation forum, the claim by Hale to have bounced a U-2 at 88,000’ must be labelled as a figment of his imagination.

No U-2 could, or can today, reach 88,000’.
At lighter weights, level flight at 70 - 75,000’ is possible: but the margin between Mach buffet IAS at around 102kts IAS and a conventional level flight stall at around 94 knots is small. Smaller still when turning.

Add in survivability – the U-2 pilot wears a pressure suit and the F3 pilot wears leg restrainers & a g-suit.

#43 Another driver in an F6 had a close encounter with the North Sea and ended up pulling an estimated 13½G pull up ..... He told us that he had lace marks from his g-suit on his legs for days afterwards.


A great survival story. But surely even this very tough F6 was bent beyond flyability having exceeded twice the normal “g” limit?

Which airframe serial was it?

[longer ron]

I think 2 separate incidents have been mixed up

The Lightning that once overtook Concorde was described as 'the best of the best' by Flt Lt Mike Hale at the roll-out ceremony for XR749 at Teeside Airport on September 28th 1995. Now an instructor with 56 Sqn at Coningsby, Mike flew 80 sorties in XR749 after the aircraft was allocated to 11 Squadron at Binbrook. He has a particular affection for the aircraft: "The Lightning was an exceptional aircraft in every respect, but XR749 was one of the best of the best. It is probably the best aircraft that I will ever have had the privilege to fly. Because of her tail code BM, she was known as 'Big Mother', although the tail code changed to BO for her last few months on 11 before joining the LTF in January 1985. She was a very hot ship, even for a Lightning. She remained my aircraft for all her time on 11 Sqn despite my being entitled to an F6 as I moved up the squadron pecking order. I invariably asked for her to be allocated to me for the major exercises such as MALLET BLOW, OSEX, and ELDER FOREST despite her being a short range F3 - there were invariably plenty of tankers about!"
His memories include the time in April 1984, during a squadron exchange at Binbrook, when he and XR749 participated in unofficial time-to-height and acceleration trials against F-104 Starfighters from Aalborg. The Lightnings won all races easily, with the exception of the low level supersonic acceleration, which was a dead-heat. This is not surprising when the records show that the year before on one sortie XR749 accelerated to Mach 2.3 (1500 mph) in September 1983.
It was also in 1984, during a major NATO exercise that he intercepted an American U-2 at 66,000 ft, a height which they had previously considered safe from interception. Shortly before this intercept, he flew a zoom climb to 88,000ft

[longer ron]

Bigglesbrother
A great survival story. But surely even this very tough F6 was bent beyond flyability having exceeded twice the normal “g” limit?

Which airframe serial was it?



Possibly this one ??


Lightning F.6 XS898/K c/n 95244. f/f 20.5.66, Salmesbury Warton for storage. 9.1.67 'K' 5 Sqn. 30.1.73 60 MU overhaul, returned approx 4.73. 17.7.76 store. 6.78 'J' 5 Sqn with experimental unit markings. 2.80 store. 8.80 declared Cat 3 for wing cracks, fuel leaks and u/c mounting bracket. Airframe severely overstressed (IOG-14G) following pilot disorientation causing dive at Mach 1.3, but aircraft safely recovered to Binbrook, where stripped down and repaired with reinforcing plates! 27.3.81 'BC' 11 Sqn. 3.83 'AK' 5 Sqn. Storage with periodic air tests until 14.5.86 'BM' 11 Sqn. 7.5.87 store. 29.7.87 'BD' 11 Sqn. 30.6.88 Cranfield for Mr Arnold Glass.

[Ali Barber]

The 13.5 g was an estimate as the needle had wrapped itself around the end stop. Initially they thought there was nothing wrong with the aircraft, but next morning it had a distinct sag as the main spar had cracked. It sat in the hangar for a couple of years while they figured out what to with it and eventually welded some railway track to the main spar. Because it had been off flying for so long, when it came out again, it was the aircraft with the least overall fatigue on it so any high g sortie was planned to use that one!

[PTR 175]

Re data link,

sorry a bit late on this. The data would have come to the aircraft via the UHF Radio, ARC 52 and maybe later the PTR 175. How sufficent data could have come over that RF link with AM modulation with sufficient redundency is still a complete mystery to me. Range 200 miles at 10,000 feet.

Would this be enough range. Can anybody point me to a good site that explains it better ?

Only had the pleasure of one once, that was at Cosford during training.

Thank You

[Fortissimo]

Assuming we are talking of the same incident, the culprit told me that when he admitted to his sqn cdr that he had pulled 'a lot more than 10g', sqn cdr got cross and shouted "Why did you pull that much G?!!"

Reply: "Because I couldn't pull any f*****g harder!"

[Pontius Navigator]

PTR, 200 miles/ 10,000 feet is a little optimistic. Best you could hope for at 10k would be 114 miles. For 200 miles you would need to be at 30k which would be about right for a cruise near the trop.

The radio would most likely have been the ARC52 at the time. As for link capacity, Link 16 it was not. Think more an advance 1200 bps modem was circa 1990. The data link was probably slow and sequential with one command at a time.

[Pontius Navigator]

Bigglesbro, it was not just g-pants that he would have been wearing but a full partial pressure jerkin with sleeves and a Taylor partial pressure helmet. The latter allowed FL660 rather than the FL560 for the P/Q mask. I think the sleeves on the pressure jerkin permitted even greater heights to be flown. These were of course oxygen equipment limits and not necessarily air frame limits. IIRC the Lightning had the Mk 21 regulator that could deliver 30mm overpressure at 45,000ft and 70mm at 56,000ft.

Later our Mk 21s were downgraded to the Mk 17 which meant we could go to 50,000ft with only the P/Q mask. Then someone discovered aerodynamic suck which reduced the permitted oxygen flight levels by about 2000 feet.

[BOAC]

PN - unless the 'high flyer' was pre-planned. Hale would not have been wearing more than the posing kit biggles mentions, and thus to go to '88,000ft' (if only!) would be very foolish, and when he throttled back to come back down he would probably have in a very bad way with the loss of cabin pressure!

[Pontius Navigator]

BOAC, haven't checked the dates but the kit I was describing was in the late 60s. I believe the Taylor helmet didn't continue much after that.

As for flying at the airframe limit rather than the AvMed limit I think that has happened more than once. Too tempting to 'forget' what will happen if you have to step out the office before it has come to a complete stop.

[Arkroyal]

As a meer chopper puke, I was always in awe of this machine.

My first memory was as a twelve year old kid at Farnborough '64 where a formation team of 4 (IIRC) put on a very impressive turn. The noise was awesome and internal organ wrecking vibration too.

A year later, as an ATC cadet I can remember being more than slightly impressed by a talk given by the CO's son who was operational on them at the time.

I recall about that time a very good photo in the 'Daily Mirror' i think, of a lightning in a vertical dive about to bury itself in an east anglian field, as a tractor driver looks on.

Later, as a QHI teaching fighter evasion in the west country, we were allocated some 'nings as opposition! (All Navy Hunters, our usual foe, on exercise up north) I can still see the lightning passing me nose about 20degrees up, flames belching from both exhausts, and still going downwards at about a hundred feet AGL. Very imressive! No kills, as I remember.

A Wessex mate (initials MF) on 72 squadron in NI about 1981 used to tell a story of his time on the lighning OCU very similar to the 10+ G over the north sea story. That's how he claimed to wind up on helicopters! Too 'impressed' to continue the course!

Just got an email from Amazon by strange co-incidence: Lightning Eject: The Dubious Safety Record of Britain's Only Supersonic Fighter: Amazon.co.uk: Peter Caygill: Books
That'll be a good read.

Fantastic aeroplane.

[fantom]

F6 on APC in Akrotiri shot himself down. Very neat trick, I thought, took real skill to do that.



Quite. I can beat it though.
Rashid range (where the Alu plant is now near Dubai) my pairs leader thought he would film me from behind as I dropped 2x 100 gal 'napalm' loads - water, of course. I seem to recall it was 450 kts/50' agl. Anyway that excellent camera - F ninety-something - he was using revealed that, shortly after the release, he entered a very low-level black Cb of desert and general detritus and limped home to Sharjah. I, on my first A/G 30mm collected a round from the target frame, into the right eng intake, which stripped every single compressor blade from the engine. Deadstick into SHJ for which I deserved a medal.
My logbook reads:'Two shot down'.
The pairs leader was the mod of this forum beginning with 'W...'
True.

Memorable 1,000th post. Medal now?

[BOAC]

He filmed you 'dropping' at 20' with an ?F95?:eek: One hopes he has learnt about flying from that...................:).

[Al R]

F6 on APC in Akrotiri shot himself down. Very neat trick, I thought, took real skill to do that.

That one almost landed on us near Bacon Grill Hill (well, it was the 80s). The years have addled my grey matter but I'm sure it had flamed out - I have this impression of it whistling in almost silently, there was a banging sound which I seem to still think was an ejection seat rail clattering - could it have been fuel burning off in the engine (car equiv would be unburned fuel I guess, cooking off in the exhaust manifold).

Either way, imagine 4 young rockapes, hearing about this inbound impending doom on the net, seeing it glide in, and then running around like headless chickens because we hadn't got a clue where it would land. It went over very low and did it skip and bounce when it hit - it made a hell of a noise and the sound I recall is the screeching sound of metal coming apart - I think it ended up on a gradual slope in someone's back garden.

[Pontius Navigator]

fantom, which accounts for the fact that we now use aluminium poles for the strafe targets despite the cost. A marksman however would shoot the shackles which of course were steel.

We acquired some Scimitars as targets and it was deemed that the 30mm aluminium 'armour' was soft as far as the Aden was concerned. A USAFE F15 engaged one (natural target really) and we never found the lid.

[ARXW]

noprobs,
I started turning hard after the first pass, and quickly suckered him into a low speed fight that soon led to a level scissors in which I was getting the better position. On the next cross, I saw him apparently doing the sensible thing, getting ready to bug out as his nose sliced down away from me. However, as I reversed, I saw his nose continuing to move in the same yawing motion, as he entered a spin. We still had plenty of height, he had a recoverable aircraft, and I had a jet in which I could change the thrust vector. So I moved the nozzles to the braking stop, pointed vertically down, and did my best to get the pipper on the rotating cockpit for the film.

Whoever said that speed is life! Here's a story confirming the usefulness of VIFFing! This decription reminded of a story by a naval ace who said that the Harrier force always kept the advantage in exchanges with the Lightning force although of course the higher exchange ratio dropped as they moved from the unknown 1v1 phase to the "have seen what you can do" 1v1 phase through to many vs many sorties.

Thought the burnerless Lighntning even simulated the Argie Mirage 3 for the RAF Harrier force when they were practising at being interceptors in order to bolster task force interceptor numbers down south in '82. Having said that, reheat or not I bet the latter Mirage F1 was a handful in ACT.

[BOAC]

ARXW - having Lightning'd and viffed a fair bit, 'Viffing' is excellent, yes, but in more than a 1v1 you can find yourself at a distinct disadvantage having nozzled away your IAS and being left as an almost 'stationary' target with no K E.

[BEagle]

On Suffolk's phinest phighter squadron, we once did some ACT with FAF Mirage F1s after the Malvinas war, with the FAF simulating Matra 530 profiles...

We did the usual QWI-briefed stuff, they kept it simple. They won!

Nice jet, big engine, good radar and weapon system.....SSSETOWTF as I understand the saying goes!

[AGS Man]

Some years ago speaking with a bunch of Saudi Air Force F15 pilots, many who had flown the Lightning I asked which they preffered. The common consencus was the Lightning with the F15 weapon system.

[NutLoose]

This months Classic Aircraft magazine has a 6 page article on the U2 Lightning interceptions, if anyone is interested.

[ARXW]

Ask one of our old F1 pilots about fighting against the phantom - they'll quickly dismiss it as: not a problem! (we used to have both, in fact we're still flying the phantom down in the south-eastern Med with all the latest gadgets on it). I imagine French M F1 would have had similar disdain for la phantom britannique (the Lightning that is)! The F1 had better T/W than the Mirage 3 but still compared to the mighty Lightning it was certainly lacking. Then again the phantom was also found lacking compared to the Lightning unless you want to talk about a very clean Spey jet.

talking about frightenings, how does this qualify?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUY0ut6gOxY

[Finningley Boy]

As a former SLEWC and Type 64 operator I seem to recall that we couldn't get automatic height read outs on the SLEWC from Lightnings, we had to call the HFR Operator and give him the range and bearing. However, my memory is etchy, but I do believe it was something like that.:}

FB:)

[ORAC]

No Mode C on the Frightning, so all claimed infringements by civil jets could be handled by the correct turn of phrase when speaking to the pilot. e.g.

"22, Staxton, LATCC has claimed you got to close to his 747 at FL350, confirm you had separation?"

"Affirmative Staxton, good visual and not above FL340".

As for flying at the airframe limit rather than the AvMed limit I think that has happened more than once. It was common in the last 6 months before Binbrook shut as every one tried to see how high they could get. Up to TTL6 or 8 then north followed by a high speed run south parallel to the coast and then a zoom climb before recovery. HF200 showed heights around 80K.

The most memorable was the response from the pilot who was heading towards the Aggressor Area and to whom I gave several avoiding turn instructions. After replying "Wait" in response to the first few, he eventual explained.

"Staxton, I would if I could, but I can't. I'm VFR above* and slowly toppling end over end and it's very, very quiet. When things start working again, I'll let you know".

*Top of the MRSA was either FL600 or FL660 at the time, can't remember when it changed.

Rather p*ssed of Midland Radar when I handed another off for recovery at the edge of the Dive Arc along the lines of "22, on recovery, VFR." It was only when he checked in they discovered he was VFR above. :E

[Chairborne 09.00hrs]

I'm sure I met the chap in person at an airshow yonks ago: his name-tab on the growbag was "13G Fynes"

[Ivan Rogov]

I was lucky enough to live near them as a child, they were awe inspiring and I spent much of my primary education looking out the windows....... needless to say I joined the RAF :ok:

ISTR there were concepts for a swing wing design and side intakes, anyone have more information? Also wasn't there a suggestion to fit 4 x AIM-9?

[Treble one]

Ivan

I believe the 'swing wing' concept was proposed for a navalised version of the Lightning. It was not a conventional variable geometry wing such as the GR4 and F-111, but more variable geometry at the end of the wings (if that makes sense)....

Cheers
TO

[green granite]

The P3 was the proposed variant with the side intakes, The variable geometry proposal doesn't appear to have a number.

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i11/orangeherald/Untitled.jpg

[phil9560]

Back in 1984 I was on an ATC camp at Binbrook.My AEF was flown by an 11 Sqn pilot-quite an experience for a jet obsessed 14 year old.He admonished me for staring at the artificial horizon instead of looking outside.Apparently I'd 'get away with it at Woodvale but round here you're likely to get a Lightning up your arse'.Best flight I ever had-the poor Chippy was hurled all around the sky.

Anyway that year was a significant Lightning anniversary (30 years).As such there was a celebratory airshow at Binbrook.The Lightning prototype was on static and as we overflew prior to landing he banked above it,looked down and said 'ugly bugger at first wasn't she '?

Love to do it again.I'd mither him senseless instead of being an awestruck teenager :)

[Pontius Navigator]

That swing wing design looks similar to the Fitter C. That design avoided the need for modification to the undercarriage.

[noprobs]

Drifting still further off thread down memory lane.....

The talk of Mirage F1 capabilities reminds me of a HUD film I saw on Maple Flag years ago. One of our JPs was seeing how low he dared fly down a fire break between the trees when he had a bit of a fright, the reason for which he sought to demonstrate on his film. Careful examination showed a single frame with the side view of an F1's fin in the bottom of the picture. The F1 was being flown with Gallic flair along a crossing fire break, just a little lower than our JP's jet.

[A A Gruntpuddock]

Not a pilot (unfortunately), but at airshows you just had to see the Lightning, Red Arrows (Gnats) and the Vulcan.

Used to see demented Phantom pilots hurtling around, awesome, but they could never quite match the turning circle of the big cigar tube.

Lots of really good stuff flying about, but the big 3 were always the 'must see' shows.

[Warped Factor]

Back in 1984 I was on an ATC camp at Binbrook.My AEF was flown by an 11 Sqn pilot-quite an experience for a jet obsessed 14 year old.He admonished me for staring at the artificial horizon instead of looking outside.Apparently I'd 'get away with it at Woodvale but round here you're likely to get a Lightning up your arse'.Best flight I ever had-the poor Chippy was hurled all around the sky.

As a Flight Staff Cadet on 12AEF in the late 70s I flew a number of times in the Chipmunk with Wg Cdr Colin Bidie, a former Boss of 56 Squadron. On one flight I recall we tried to emulate the display he used to do in the Lightning, didn't quite have the vertical penetration though.

Great people, happy days.

[RAFEngO74to09]

I thought some might enjoy this - the last Lightning solo display at RIAT 1987. Flown by the then Flt Lt Jon Fynes (perhaps of 13G fame mentioned earlier ?) who went on to be Gp Capt Fynes, Commandant of CFS.

Lightning last solo display at R.I.A.T. 1987. - YouTube

[Cabe LeCutter]

I was around for the Akrotiri self hack. The pilot shot the wheel off the banner which went down the intake and trashed an engine. He limped home on the other engine which gave out on short finals where the pilot punched out and landed on base. The SAR crew were a little peeved as it was a land on recovery, well not many wet winching jobs out there. The jet ended up close to the main gate in a farmers mandra, he was happy as he could see pound signs in the sky.

Later that day in the bar, the pilot sporting a rather fat lip was in conversation with the Station Commander who was after a Lightening as Gate Guard. "Well Sir, I got it as close as I could". Makes a good story.:ok:

Heads down, look out for the flack

[RAFEngO74to09]

Pathe News item from 1965 - there is an ad first but it's a better copy than the one on You Tube.

LIGHTNINGS TO GERMANY - British Pathé (http://www.britishpathe.com/video/lightnings-to-germany/query/lightnings+germany)

Commentary by Mr Cholmondley-Warner !

[Pontius Navigator]

Lots of airframes there, by British standards.

I recall an F4 stude coming in to the office. His instructions were to brief on the Mig 21. Had I got anything on the Mig 21 :)

Well I said, what do you need to know? I said they have 4,000 for starters. A clear indication of quantity being a quality all of its own.

[Wander00]

I recall the last diplay day at Binbrook - VERY wet. Somewhere I have a photo of I++ B++++ doing about M.98 in the rain - and the shock waves on nose and canopy clearly visible. A few months earlier there was a retirement bash at Neatishead for OC Ops, the only Branch commissioned wg cdr in the RAF ISTR (John ????). Lightning was due to fly over -"Where are you ?" asked the Neatishead controller. "Pulling up between the twoers NOW" came the reply. Trouble was he was at Bacton Gas Terminal

[bigglesbrother]

Post #47 – The Lightning (Mk3) that once overtook Concorde was described as 'the best of the best' by Flt Lt Mike Hale at the roll-out ceremony for XR749 at Teeside Airport on September 28th 1995.....

Having made a few transatlantic crossings on Concorde as a pax, I was twice invited to spend some time on the flight deck.

Thus with stick time on the Mk3 & having enjoyed & observed the standard routine Concorde cruise parameters, it is impossible to believe that a Mk3 Lightning ever overtook a Concorde in normal cruise.

The Lightning Mk3 was fast and could accelerate well, but it had only just enough fuel to reach Mach2 on a carefully planned out and back flight.

Pilot’s Notes for the same fuel capacity, but smaller engined Mk1 quote a fuel consumption of 300lbs per minute, per engine, at a Mach 1.7 cruise. Full wing + ventral fuel at start-up is 7,284lbs Avtag.

Throwing in a lucky encounter with a tanker at toc may help a little – if the tanker AND CONCORDE routing are perfectly timed to allow our aviator in XR749 to make a crossing intercept & still have just enough fuel to safely rtb. An angled intercept & missile acquisition just maybe, but not an overtake and wave as you pass Hale (hail?) manoeuvre.

But back to the real world of onboard fuel, for how many minutes could a Mk3 fly at Mach 2?

One minute, maybe two .... and to overtake a Concorde in cruise it needed Mach 2+.

This is another figment of imagination which has become more heroic with time....... Nonetheless a great and enjoyable tale.

The Lightning (Mk3) is a great hotrod in many ways, but it is severely fuel limited, rather than aerodynamically limited when operating at the higher Mach numbers.



Google to see this hotrod Lightning Mk3 picture ....... XR749 - Score Group PLC (gate guard), Glenugie Engineering Works, Peterhead, Aberdeenshire

[tartare]

Interesting.
I'd always assumed the bounce the U2 and catch the Concorde stories were legit.
Will read the Classic Wings article with interest...

[BOAC]

In all these 'stories', only the participants will know the truth, the Lightning pilots and the U2 pilot in particular. I have (kindly) given the benefit of the doubt to those who tell the tales. However, having done 65+ a few times and experienced the almost complete lack of control I have always felt a sense of wonderment and an element of doubt. BUT as the saying goes - I wasn't here.:)

[ORAC]

Bigglesbrother.

Saw successful* Lightning M2+ stern intercepts twice. (*As claimed by pilots in debrief anyway)

First, 1975-76, Wattisham F3 during exercise against Mirage IV.

The exercise routine was that the FAF would send a pair with a KC135 up the North Sea and they'd then do a M2.0 run south before RTB. LATCC would give us a heads up and we would scramble a pair of F6 with red Top to sit plugged into a tanker on TTL6 waiting for them to break cover and then break off with full tanks and do a frontal intercept when they were about 150nm north.

On this occasion, due to various problems, we ended up with an F6 and an F3 (flown by "the Wandering Milliamp"). The F3 intercept was performed as normal. The F3 was controlled by one of the older WOs and set up for a U26A(?) - 180 x 26 converting to a 90 x 8. He rolled out at 3-4 miles, closed and took the Fox 2 about 20nm north of Bravo 1 at about 48K - and diverted into CS because he didn't have enough gas to reach WT. Landed on fumes.

The Concorde intercept was on the occasion when it flew a trial as a high speed target for the UK AD sqns. Concorde flew a preplanned figure of 8 around the North Sea at a constant M2.0 with height between FL500-550 to hold the speed. Their were pre-planned CAPs and intercept points and times. As above the Binbrook CAPs were supported by AAR with the fighters dropping off the hose at the optimal point, height, heading and range to start to accelerate for the intercept - though on that occasion they were F6.

[BOAC]

That sounds bizarre! I'm having trouble with that one, ORAC. Why fly a 180 x when you have a head-on capability? I would also think I would want to see the target about 40 off at the 90 to have a chance. Having 'turned back' from a M2 chase towards the Cape on a Blinder to desperately get back to the tanker and avoid banging out into the North Sea at 0100 I reckon 8 miles is a touch optimistic for a M2 turning circle?

Now - how long does it take at M2 and a bit to close from 3-4 mm to missile release range (which would have been v close at that speed) on a M2 target? Even at M2.1 (which would be pretty impressive after a 90) it would take a couple of minutes. IF it worked, it was very impressive!

[ORAC]

Stern because the F3 in question was E02+0 not F02+2. (Firestreak, not Redtop - no frontal capability)

The geometry for the crossing leg is 90 x 8 to reflect the turning circle, not the point at which the turn is started. IIRC the northbound leg was flown at about M1.3 with acceleration in the crossing leg and final turn ordered at about 50 off.

IIRC the Concorde intercepts the Lightnings were F020+2, geometry was planned as a 150 x 0 with tgt crossing left to right; ( from dim memory, maybe wrong - acquire and Fox 2 with port Mx in zoom, roll inverted to expose starboard Mx, Fox 2 and pull through.)

However at least one took Judy and converted to a stern intercept.

Added - Radius of Turn in nm:

Mach No at Trop/AOB 45 - 1.4G/AOB 60- 2.0G/TAS

1.6/12.3/7.1/917

1.7/13.9/8.0/975

1.8/15.5/9.0/1032

1.9/17.3/10.0/1089

2.0/19.2/11.1/1147

[Ali Barber]

Once had a go at Concorde for a stern shot with Firewood. Worked out the turning radius and acceleration point from the ODM, but then only got one burner. Turned early and pulled loads of lead to try and roll out in front and below, then snapshoot up to it as it overtook me. Didn't get within a country mile of the damn thing!

[BOAC]

Thanks for all that. 50 off is close to my guess! I mis-interpreted the '90 x 8' as a 'B-Scoper' would:). Altogether a pretty good result for the WO! Those radius figures are interesting.

Initials for "the Wandering Milliamp"?

[BOAC]

Thanks for all that. 50 off is close to my guess! I mis-interpreted the '90 x 8' as a 'B-Scoper' would:). Altogether a pretty good result for the WO. Those radius figures are interesting.

Initials for "the Wandering Milliamp"?

[ORAC]

D*** F*****

[BOAC]

Aha - known by another name at the OCU. I always reckoned his parents must have had a wicked sense of humour.:D

[ORAC]

Some good but strange guys on the Lightning. I had Red Dog as my OC Ops at Stanley, mad as a coot. AFAIK he's the only person banned from the bar at Binbrook at the same time he was PMC?

His office at Stanley was the portacabin on the AtC room, he used to come out onto the roof in the morning and the aircrew would come out, bow down and worship him and throw up Star Bars as tribute. He'd gather them up, administer a blessing on the gathering and then return grandly inside.

[BOAC]

Ah memories - knew 'RD' from uni days in the 60's and we trained together at BFTS and bounced off each other through our careers. Last seen by me at the BAC '50th' at Duxford a few moons ago. Didn't know about the Star Bar addiction......

[newt]

Some good but strange guys on the Lightning


Strange ORAC!!!! I resemble that remark!!!!! We did have a lot of characters I must admit but it was great fun!:ok:

[Above The Clouds]

So where is LM :p

[Bevo]

I have posted this before but the memory is still vivid. During the early1970s, while stationed at RAF Lakenheath flying Phantoms, I got the opportunity for one flight in the Lightning at RAF Coltshall. This was of course a two seat version and unfortunately I don’t remember the assigned squadron. The thing I remember most was the excellent handling qualities of the aircraft compared to the Phantom especially in pitch. A very shot legged aircraft, however, and it seemed like we were out of gas just after we got airborne. This led to the reputation that Coltshall had among our pilots as a great place to divert to when the weather was really nasty as the GCA lads there were outstanding in their craft. We assumed that was because the Lightings were always short on fuel and couldn’t make very many missed approaches.

[Courtney Mil]

Bevo,

Yes the Colt boys were great at talk-downs, but I would say the service we had at all the FJ stations was excellent.

[Plastic Bonsai]

It was the Lightnings' last week in service and as I was driving home down a long lane near Leconfield I was a little surprised to see a Jaguar coming in the opposite direction in the avenue of trees being followed very closely by a Lightning only a few feet behind and above it. As they roared overhead I glanced round in time to spot a second Jaguar trying to tuck down behind a very small hill with 2 Lightnings following just as closely.

Low fast and fabulous.

If anyone here wants to own up to this particular cat bullying... I'd just like to say thanks.

[safetypee]

“… the Colt boys were great at talk-downs,” Hey don’t forget those lasses; very good unflappable ATC: –
Self, turning down-wind after chute failure declaring priority, to which the response was “one on GCA, three ahead downwind; you are number four with the same priority!”

[Bicster]

I hope nobody minds me asking a bit of a daft question, its one ive been itching to ask for years. On a very high performance aircraft such as the Lightning as you were cruising along and decided to select reheat on both engines what was the sensation like? Also what was the rate of the airspeed increase like, I suppose the word I should be using is acceleration? Thanks in advance to anybody who could put this one to bed for me.

[ORAC]

CS Lasses, The one I can remember from 75 Was Gay Woolnough (sp?) after the Jags arrived.

Had one pilot flying the circuit in hysterics of laughter in the cockpit till he calmed down - after she made him overshoot because, quote, "She'd just had an abortion on the runway"....

[Bevo]

Courtney Mil (http://www.pprune.org/members/375756-courtney-mil) Bevo,

Yes the Colt boys were great at talk-downs, but I would say the service we had at all the FJ stations was excellent. I don't doubt it. Just that Coltshall was the closest divert base with Lightnings. :)

[Al R]

:8 time.

Ref that video of the low flier attacking the camera; did it have missiles on the upper wings? If so, what was the effect on lift - am I right in thinking that it would be increased?

[cornish-stormrider]

want more WIWOL tales, one of best threads of evah!!!!

VFR above - I presume that translates into engineerspeak as f*****g high up...

[tartare]

Aside from the overwing and ventral tanks - did they ever consider any kind of conformal dorsal or spine tanks to increase range?
Maybe there were area rule implications...

[ORAC]

Ref that video of the low flier attacking the camera; did it have missiles on the upper wings?

Fuel tanks. Peeled off upwards and backwards if jettisoned. Limited max speed and G limit.

[Al R]

Cheers. I don't want to sound like a spotter, but if the tanks disrupted and slowed down (?) airflow over the wing topside, would that increase lift, getting you to altitude more efficiently? Why were they used if they chopped top speed (useful for an interceptor) - were they used if CAP was necessary if tension was heightened/loitering required? Was the Lightning ever used to loiter - what was the longest sortie and was it any good at it (it must have required frequent topping up?) or would the Phantom have been used for that instead?

(geek, I know)

[green granite]

Fuel tanks. Peeled off upwards and backwards if jettisoned. Limited max speed and G limit.

Also they could carry 1000lb retarded bombs, seem to remember the company I worked for being involved in the release trials for I think the Saudi's

[1.3VStall]

tartare, they did put fuel in the flaps of the later marks.

[bobward]

Amongst my treasured souvenirs is a brochure on the Lightning that I picked up at Farnborough in 1968. In it they show pairs of Matra combined rocket / fuel pods on each wing pylon. This version also had outer wing pylons outboard of the wheel wells. Thei could carry a pair of SNEB pods or 1,000 pound persuader.

All in all, the export jet could carry a heap of goodies, yet the only accessories the RAF ones had were the over wing tanks. Surely WIWOL chums would have welcomed a pair of AIM-9's on the outer points?

:)

[lightningmate]

bobward

You can take most of the ground display weapon loads seen at Farnborough, and other similar gatherings, with a very large pinch of salt. Choose just a few from the range displayed and that might be a possible flight configuration. Apart from the total mass to be lifted and the levels of drag induced the release characteristics of weapons require stringent limitations to be applied that invariably limit what else can be carried alongside.

Initially, there was an intention to field an Air-to-Air 2" Rocket Pack for Lightnings, interchangeable with the Missile Pack, this was quickly dropped following 'exciting' flight trials!

Everyone understood that jettisoning the 'Overburgers' with fuel inside would possibly break the wings. Hence, the limitation to jettison only when empty. Allegedly, a ground trial at Warton jettisoning Full Over-Wing Tanks broke both wing spars and then the Tanks just fell off. Not sure what drove anyone to try this without the benefit of aerodynamic separation, almost a bound to happen scenario!

The Overburgers were rarely fitted, being confined to long distance ferry sorties, eg UK to Singapore or similar.

lm

[ORAC]

Not quite true. The LTF had the AFS (Airfix Special), which was a T5 fitted with the large ventral, over wing tanks and a fresnel lens in place of the radar to increase radar size. They flew it as a target and it would stay up long enough for 2 consecutive student sorties in F6 against it.

[lightningmate]

ORAC

Sorry, I was unaware of such a beast. It was not around during my periods with the force. All that time in a Tub flying target profiles, deep joy http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wbored.gif

Possibly a little entertaining following an engine failure after Vstop on a warm day?

Some Lightning Squadron Commanders would have loved such a toy, the Chinagraph Line would have been pushed exponential!

lm

[BOAC]

Not long after my arrival on 23(F) I, as JP, was detailed to go punch some holes in the midnight sky for the 'chinagraph line' with O/W tanks on a Mk6. I elected, for fun, to file airways and entered at Manchester northbound using only offset Tacan to navigate. Much hilarity from ATC as they enquired whether I needed vectors to remain in the airway.:)

Those O/Ws were BORING! I seem to recall 2.5g limit until empty and your lookout went for a ball of chalk - not that you could do much if bounced:{

[safetypee]

IIRC most of the stores/configs listed were flow by, or in support of the overseas programs.
One of the exciting flight trials of the 2” rockets was in a T5 when the open nose-doors reduced the directional stability during the rapid roll / pull out after launch. The fin departed the aircraft followed by the pilot shortly after.
I also have seen the film of the ‘twirler’, where a 2” projectile having launched, then returned to pass over the wing!

There were some early RAF development plans for fitting sidewinders on the under wing pylons, and also for a ‘Y’ nose pylon enabling a four missile fit on the nose. These did not progress beyond the Group project office as there was no money and the proposals might have conflicted with the then emergent Mk 6 gun fit.

Overwing tanks were used at Leuchars for some low level CAP trials (and low level training – for the hours), and for the air defense of the RN in UK waters. The latter task dropped the tank idea when we lost a chase and turning fight with some Buccaneers
However, for overseas deployment they did help, and I recall (that I did not notice) that the airspeed limit resulted in a relatively high Mach No during a run and break at a high altitude Middle East airfield; Boss debrief – nice run and break, but don’t do it again.

[Canadian Break]

IIRC part of the issue in putting anything other than Firestreak/Redtop on the beast was the missile cooling (ammonia?). In terms of spectacles, C2 and P2 coming through the aeriel farm at Akrotiri when the final two APC Lightnings there were replaced by the F4s from Germany (92Sqn?) after Op El Dorado Canyon in 1986. Left F4s rocking on their undercarriage and bodies hurling themselves off the wings. Other interesting stories about this det available in plain brown envelopes!!!:E

[Fitter2]

tartare, they did put fuel in the flaps of the later marks

I suppose that makes the F1A a 'later' mark. The tins of PRC used to seal the tanks had a very short shelf life, but time-expired tins were very useful for all manner of car (and glider) maintenance................

[Courtney Mil]

The forum was getting a bit dull in some areas, but this thread is getting really good. Don't hold back, guys. Keep it coming. :ok:

[lightningmate]

Aha, someone mentioned the disaster committing Lightnings to defend the Fleet at Sea. I was never able to determine which complete idiot of an Air Marshall, presumably at a Purple Cocktail Party, was suckered in by the Dark Blue to make such a totally stupid comittment.

The result, fuel capacity challenged aircraft operating miles out over the oggin, outside of TACAN range usually, totally reliant on AAR support and trying to find a bunch of boats that were nowhere near the position they originally intended. Then, to add to the fun and games, all intercepts were controlled by RN Controllers, usually against Buccs travelling rapidly and low down. Tricky enough by day, with the fuel gauges unwinding rapidly at 500 kts plus, but at night! Fast targets well below the Lightning authorised minimum intercept operating height at night (1500ft) - no Rad Alts in those days - trying to operate the Radar whilst holding a significant push force on the control column at high speed, trim already fully nose down. More than just a few people arrived home with fumes only and a few early grey hairs.

The flying was demanding and one learnt very quickly to protect recovery options during that time. But frustration with Senior Management that denied any problems and castigated anyone who tried to say otherwise was never far away.

The one highlight for me, invited to make an approach to Ark Royal, the angled deck version. Sensibly resisted the urge to fly a bolter, and then was much amused to observe a Victor Tanker also having a go.

lm

[safetypee]

Oh, more Coltishall ATC. There was the day (AOC review) when 28 aircraft were launched in marginal weather (many longer stories in that), where the first aircraft to return (OC Ops), landed downwind, lost the chute and took the barrier. The subsequent three aircraft were “cleared to land, barrier up and engaged.”
A few more aircraft made it back to Colt, but the remainder were scattered around E Anglia, all short of fuel.

The following year (BoB) we flew 16 – with a new OC Ops.

http://i47.tinypic.com/314qc5c.jpg

[lightningmate]

I remember that day, just, was the famed OC Ops known affectionately as 'Apple'?

Several divertees arrived at Wattisham and proceeded to recount to us the whole, almost unbelievable, saga. If I recall correctly, Apple, sitting in the Barrier with career fading by the second, was desperately trying to take over ATC by instructing people to land over the top of his aircraft stuck in the Barrier. At least that direction was into wind, but nobody obliged.

And then there was Arthur, a hangar and no brakes :\.

lm

[D120A]

Overwing tanks had not been fitted for some years by the early 1980s, their limitations (subsonic only, 20 kt crosswind limit on dry rather than 25kt, etc.) being deemed to be more of a nuisance than their fuel was worth. So they were stored at North Coates in a shed and covered in bird poo when we suddenly become interested in them again in 1981.

This interest was sparked by a little technical trouble on a Taceval part 1, after which we forensically inspected our tasking paperwork and re-discovered the requirement to be able to role into overburgers. This had died from neglect, two-year posting cycles being a wonderful killer of corporate memory...

The least poo-ed on pair of OWTs were retrieved and made serviceable, then another etc. until we had four pairs through the tank bay. All the seals had perished but the Suppliers had a stock. However, making the OWTs behave correctly on an aircraft took several days. Eventually we succeeded (and pilots queued up to fly with with them but, I noticed, only once...) and we carefully noted which tanks successfully matched with which station on which airframe. Come Taceval part 2 we were given the task to role one aircraft in OWTs, so we selected the airframe and the tanks apparently 'at random' but in reality via some fast footwork the airframe/tank match we wanted. So from a supposedly cold start, producing a serviceable OWT-fitted aircraft took us only about 3 hours. The aircraft was then scrambled IIRC on an endurance CAP with no tanker support to prove to the evaluators that the tanks worked. Big tick in box.

Come Op Corporate we roled and flew 2 F6s in OWTs (and were prepping two more), prompting the editor of the Grimsby Evening Telegraph, who had the habit of looking out of his window, to call up to ask when we were "going to the South Atlantic". We weren't, we were just trying to get ahead of the game if anything popped up, but he didn't believe us.

The big jettison cartridges for the tanks themselves ceased to exist in the 1970s, IIRC, when they became time-expired and weren't replaced because of the damage they were known to cause. Pilot's Notes (mine are to AL15 in 1980) never caught up. The only cartridges fitted were for fuel jettison from the tanks themselves, in their rear boat-tail fairings.

And ORAC, I am afraid no T5 could be fitted with OWTs because they had F3 wings; the T55s with F6 wings undoubtedly could, but we had none of those. LTF's target, IIRC was an F6 with an additional forward fuel pack in place of the guns. I don't recall fitting OWTs to it in my time but I bet such a vehicle with a Fresnel lens was a very useful radar target.

[safetypee]

100% lightningmate.
I arrived at Wattisham IMC with a ‘radio failure’ glued firmly to a formation member’s jet pipe. This resulted in a line astern GCA, transitioning to a pairs landing as the wheels came down.

“… then there was Arthur, a hangar and no brakes”.
A hilarious episode, except I was just leaving the hanger door next to the window which Arthur hit !
The ‘bang’ was totally disorienting, as was the brick dust fog.
A Firestreak appeared through the haze; in the flower bed – the shear bolt had gone.
Then a silhouette of the Lightning nose, stuck into an office window like an animal eating fodder. And it ate, with a roar and loud pops and ‘farts’ as the office contents (and bricks) were sucked into the intake and dispatched, duly mangled by two RR Avons, in further clouds of dust.
As senses returned, a hasty retreat was made along the front of the hanger, to be joined formation like, by Arthur hotfooting it from the cockpit, but one story up on the roof of the hanger office.

Interested parties arrived to view the spectacle; one brave engineer with a ladder near the cockpit attempted to shut the engines down by closing the HP cocks, but without success due to jammed throttle linkages. As time progressed, the roaring noise and digestion increased, the crowed slowly retreated, allowing the crash team to view the scene.

Small huddles formed to consider how to stop the engines; elects (fuse pullers), mechs (spanners), airframe (hammer), crash team (flood it). After a considerable period, panels were opened around the engines and the throttle linkage disconnected which finally stopped the engines.
With no more flying allowed, the day ended in the bar.

[ORAC]

Dull? Let's talk about AVPIN and moving it overseas by various means - such as Channel ferries......

[Union Jack]

On balance, Safetypee, I'd say that that was "frigh(t)ening" enough for most of us, albeit perhaps not quite what the OP had in mind.:O

Jack

[tartare]

Yes - they did appear optimistic in showing what could be carried:

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/militaryaviation1946-2006cutaways/images/10807/english-electric-lightning-f53-cutaway.jpg

[ColdCollation]

When you look at that cutaway, you can see why it was so short-legged. So, a question to those who flew it: would a fuselage plug have solved the problem or would that have ruined the handling?

Or... what would have solved the range problem?

[BOAC]

As mentioned way back - you have to remember what the aircraft was built for - rapid reaction, rapid time to height, fire off 2 missiles at the baddies and dash home to do it all again asap. As time went on, its role changed to reach tanked regular 6-7 hour sorties intercepting the 'baddies' in my time.

[EngAl]

I've got a dim recollection from late 67/early 68 of being in the control room at Patrington and seeing a backlit chinagraph board which had a large graph on it. It had time on the x axis and fuel on the y axis and a legend which referred, I think, to the Mk1 Lightning. When I commented on it to a controller he told me the Lightning was the only aircraft, at that time, which had its fuel monitored from the ground. Can anyone confirm that my memory is correct?

[lightningmate]

The Lightning was 'developed' from the P1 series of research aircraft. Design considerations for research aircraft do not include long term operational use, nor the need for much fuel!! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif

The P1 happened to be around when somebody decided we needed a supersonic interceptor and this was seen as a ready means of generating something to meet the requirement. Unfortunately, the system failed to grasp the need to re-design fully the aircraft engineering aspects to meet the needs of an operational platform. The Lightning was a nightmare for Sqn Engineers. Rectifying anything in the fuselage invariably required at least the Jet-Pipes to come out and often one or both engines. Fuel leaks plagued the aircraft throughout its service life and several were lost due to fuel fires in flight. I can recall a time when 56 Sqn in Cyprus had all its airframes grounded with Cat 3 Fuel Leaks. We loaned one of ours to 56's aeros pilot to keep him current, after landing that was also Cat 3 Fuel Leaks - our Boss was not amused!

It was generally accepted a Lightning required 50 hours of engineering support to generate a single flying hour.

lm

[1.3VStall]

BOAC, I was told a story in the dim, distant past that the original concept for Lightning operation proposed by English Electric was along the lines of "operational use and currency flying only" with Hunters being used for day-to-day work. Hence the original design life of only 1,000 flying hours (this of course was subsequently extended many times over the aircraft's career). Thankfully the RAF did not sign up to this method of operation!

lightningmate, you are right about the engineering effort required to keep the beasts flying. After every jet pipe/inter pipe/engine removal full reheat runs were required. Despite the high workload the Lightning generated great affection amongst the groundcrews (and obviously amongst the pilots). After all, it was British and there wasn't a navigator in sight! And before anyone asks the question, the best variant by far was the FMk2A.:ok:

[Pontius Navigator]

LM, I was probably in Cyprus around that time. Probably 1972 but every month 56 dropped on in Limassol Bay. Then one month they were in UK for an MPC and the visiting sqn on APC dropped one instead.

A friend of mine, later AVM, wrote his sqn article for the stn mag and commented that is was nice to see the visitors keeping the stats up. Someone had a quiet word in his shell-like and said they were lucky so far as no one had lost their life as well.

I remember one event, I think the pilot was Martin C***s. He was in the bar, wrapped in a blanket, large puddle of water gathering at his feet and talking 18 to the dozen. (Slower talking as he was also sinking pint upon pint of beer. Outside was the blood waggon waiting to whisk him off to PMH to see if he was OK.

[ColdCollation]

BOAC, I do appreciate that. Just interested in an answer to the question, though: what would have solved the range issue?

There are/were lots of proposed Ligntning development and it's fair to say that the vast majority were victims of politics. The VG version is pictured here but there were many others.

My question's a little off the original thread track, I know, but just curious.

[BOAC]

CC - I think it would have been such a major redesign as to render it uneconomic. As someone else said, a new fuselage with redesigned area-rule giving a fuselage tank would have been useful.

[lightningmate]

cc

The range problem was solved by funding a fleet of Air Tankers - not exactly a cheap option and its benefit was fairly limited in a War situation. Operational issues were never resolved

Firstly, the Lightning had a very limited time-on-task without Tanker Support. However, once you were engaged and burning fuel, popping back to a Tanker was not a readily available option and probably not required; see below.

Secondly, the aircraft carried an inadequate number of weapons, 2 x AAM are quickly fired out. Of course, some variants had Guns but not really the weapon of choice for the Lightning's war role in the UK ADR. Having scrambled into the North Sea Lanes and engaged, after 30 mins or so, you would probably end up fired out some 100 plus miles from base, short of fuel and essentially useless as an AD asset unless you wished to opt for the ramming tactic. Meanwhile, quite a lot of baddies are still streaming towards the UK whilst most of the UK AD assets need to scuttle back home to replenish weapons and fuel, which takes a lot of time.

Could these Lightning operational deficiencies have been resolved?

Lots more internal fuel - not really, no viable space, fuselage plugs would not have helped and could have caused aerodynamic/stability issues. External tanks - we had some but performance limiting and draggy. Rather than upgrade the entire Mk 3 force to Mk 6 standard; thus a bit more fuel. Someone opted to purchase the visual fits for the Lightning Simulators and we all know how useful that option was!

More AAMs - Firestreak and Redtop were big items with wings fitted, no alternate mounting points are obvious, always remembering you need to safely launch the beasts not just carry them around. Re-fit with Sidewinders would have required an extensive mod programme but probably would have increased the number of AAMs carried. There were attempts to 'up-gun' the Lightning, the Taildog programme got us a bit excited for a while.

In summary, we had what we had, which was far from ideal. However, UK military aircraft programmes are employment providers, if you look back over many years there are not many UK military platforms that could be classed as fully operationally effective. Hell, the Meteor, until a ventral tank was fitted, had even less operational endurance than the Lightning.

lm

[ColdCollation]

Thanks, gents.

[bigglesbrother]

Firstly, the Lightning had a very limited time-on-task without Tanker Support. However, once you were engaged and burning fuel, popping back to a Tanker was not a readily available option and probably not required...

Secondly, the aircraft carried an inadequate number of weapons, 2 x AAM are quickly fired out. Of course, some variants had Guns but not really the weapon of choice for the Lightning's war role in the UK ADR. Having scrambled into the North Sea Lanes and engaged, after 30 mins or so, you would probably end up fired out some 100 plus miles from base, short of fuel and essentially useless as an AD asset unless you wished to opt for the ramming tactic. Meanwhile, quite a lot of baddies are still streaming towards the UK whilst most of the UK AD assets need to scuttle back home to replenish weapons and fuel, which takes a lot of time.

Here are some Pilot's Notes extracts from 50 years ago.

All Lightnings had fuel in their flaps from day 1.

Fuel quantity & performance are always opposing variables.

We were lucky enough to have enjoyed flying the several hotrod Marks of Lightning over many years.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c372/fmhshoes/PNLtg4029.jpg

[chiglet]

I've got a dim recollection from late 67/early 68 of being in the control room at Patrington and seeing a backlit chinagraph board which had a large graph on it. It had time on the x axis and fuel on the y axis and a legend which referred, I think, to the Mk1 Lightning. When I commented on it to a controller he told me the Lightning was the only aircraft, at that time, which had its fuel monitored from the ground. Can anyone confirm that my memory is correct?

As an ADO at Patrington [in the Divesion Cell] then, I have NO recollection of said graph. The only backlit chinagraph boards were,
1 the "Tote Board" in the Ops room and
2 the Wx display board in the Diversion Cell.
We DID have a Log Book, which recorded every T/O and Landing from ALL Lightning Units..... Like the day 85 Sqn [Canberras] and 5 Sqn [Lightning] launched from Binbrook, which promptly went Red. Flash phone call to Leeming sorted the Lightnings. The Canberras took care of themselves.

[soddim]

Lightning mate mentions ramming - that was prescribed when I did the OCU in 1964. The OC Ops welcomed us to Royal Air Force Fighter Command (a bit rich since most of us had arrived from Chivenor) and told us that with our Lightning we would be able to despatch 4 enemy aircraft - one with each of the two missiles, one with the guns and the fourth one we would ram. I tittered 'cause I thought he had made a funny - first of many career-limiting incidents.

'If you came here to laugh young man, you can leave now' said OC Ops. No sense of humour I decided and was proved right several times through the course.

[EngAl]

Chiglet
Maybe the thing I saw was for an exercise? (possible)
Or perhaps it's a figment of my rapidly failing memory (more likely)

[Brewster Buffalo]

What was also frightening sadly was the rate of Lightning losses. For the three years 1970 to 1971 there were 23 lost - 11 attributed to fires.

This compares with 12 Harrier losses, and 11 each for the Buccaneer, Hunter and Jet Provost during the same period.

[fantom]

For the three years 1970 to 1971 there were 23 lost - 11 attributed to fires.

It was about '70 my bro-in-law, Stu Tulloch left this one on fire.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b236/minlgw/LightningF3XP742.jpg

[Avionker]

What was also frightening sadly was the rate of Lightning losses. For the three years 1970 to 1971 there were 23 lost - 11 attributed to fires.

This compares with 12 Harrier losses, and 11 each for the Buccaneer, Hunter and Jet Provost during the same period.

Unless my maths are letting me down that's 68 airframes lost in 3 years. Almost 2 per month, that's frightening beyond belief.....

[salad-dodger]

I'm worried about my math's too. How does 3 years fit into 1970 to 1971?
For the three years 1970 to 1971

S-D

[Avionker]

Doohhh!!!!! :ugh: Who feels silly now?:O

[endevol]

IIRC part of the issue in putting anything other than Firestreak/Redtop on the beast was the missile cooling (ammonia?).


The Firestreak used ammonia for cooling, the Redtop used 12,000 psi pure air. Cooling was only for the IR seeker heads, the electronics used (IIRC) Arklone or Trike. The reason for all those 40-gallon drums of water on the flight line was in case a liney copped for a face-full of liquid ammonia - your mates were supposed to dump you head first into a water barrel. Obviously, in some cases all you had to do was give a liney a funny look and you'd end up in a barrel...

I can't think of a reason why Sidewinders couldn't have been fitted - all that gubbins in the missile pack could have been replaced with ballast, the Sidewinder doesn't need much support from the airframe, unlike Firestreak/Redtop. Given the respective weights of Redtop vs Sidewinder you could have got 2 Sidewinder on each pylon. I was on 5 Sqn at the time of the Falklands war and there was talk of underwing hardpoints for Sidewinder carriage, though nothing came of that. Might have got away with overwing Sidewinders a la Jaguar, though.

Liquid ammonia, liquid oxygen, AVPIN, intake checks, it's a wonder any of us groundcrew survived!

[BEagle]

Obviously, in some cases all you had to do was give a liney a funny look and you'd end up in a barrel...

From what one hears, doesn't something similar often happen in the navy....:ooh:

[sitigeltfel]

told us that with our Lightning we would be able to despatch 4 enemy aircraft - one with each of the two missiles, one with the guns and the fourth one we would ram.

Makes a fatalistic sort of sense.........would there have been any intact bases to return to and do a turn-around? :uhoh:

[fantom]

...would there have been any intact bases to return to and do a turn-around?

I wondered that same thing doing the ex-launch nuke-cleaning drills at Bruggen. Waste of time.

[NutLoose]

Quote:
...would there have been any intact bases to return to and do a turn-around?
I wondered that same thing doing the ex-launch nuke-cleaning drills at Bruggen. Waste of time.



Ahh dressed in a see through plastic suit over the top of a NBC suit in summer sweating your nuts off trying to wash a Jag down with a bucket of soapy water and a brush... Thinking if it ever comes to this we are f**ked.
That and the Blue Peter designed decontam centre as you entered the site Hards, built from black plastic sheeting, bodge tape, broom handles and some surreal faith that it would be alright on the night..

Did you ever see the film of the trials of the first HAS's where they stuck some old aircraft and some sheep inside, nailed the door shut and detonated a simulated near miss from I think a 1000 pounder, opening the doors the narrator was wittering on about how the aircraft was damaged it could be brought back into service in days........ We were looking at all the dead sheep, as we would be living in the said HAS's.... Often wondered what pillock thought that would boost our confidence in the concrete coffins. :ugh:

.

[Pontius Navigator]

In '67 or '68, on the Malta Adex the Lightnings demonstrated the QTR is less than 10 minutes including a missile pack drop. On one sortie a colonial was spoofed by the inbound bomber and sent to Recovery. Recovery didn't realise he had been spoofed on to the freq so vectored him back to Luqa. He did a supersonic RTB, QTR, scramble, and engaged the same bomber pre-bomb release.

[BEagle]

Nope, I've read it several times and still don't understand WTF you're on about, PN......:hmm:

[Bro]

A frightening aircraft, no; exhilarating and exciting, definitely.

I think it helped that we had mostly trained on that great Lightning trainer the Gnat, although one chap on my OCU course was heard to complain that the only previous swept-wing aircraft he had flown was the Tiger Moth. First problem was trying to get your wheels up after take-off without exceeding the limiting speed of 250kt, the acceleration was amazing. I never thought that it had any bad flying habits; it normally gave plenty of warning of a spin for example, and would recover, eventually. Incidentally, years after my only Lightning tour I was converting to the Tornado. The 67° swept wing approach was considered to be quite a handful; I thought it was just like a Lightning approach.

[Al R]

NutLoose,

I was glad I was well out of the way at the bottom of a ruddy deep trench and under 3 or 4 feet of well thumped down overhead protection. Al R at front, after the fleet at Wildenrath had called it a day (1985?).

http://www.echelonwealthcare.co.uk/site/wp-content/uploads/wildenrath.jpg

[chiglet]

On a lighter note......
At a "Summer Camp" at Binbrook, I was chatting to a Chiefy. He said that "If you take the wing top fairimgs off, and bolt on a coupje of rails, then using the Nav Light circutry, you cold pop on a couple of Sidewinders"
As a member of IPMS, at that years Nationals, I exhibited a Lightning Mk6B, Two RedTops and Two Sidewinders in Dark Gre[a]y Camo. It was only when the Aviation "Experts" were told about the 'Winders, they sussed it. They ALL thought it was the colour scheme....

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Nearly...
Got a trip in a T-bird on a UAS attachment one week after soloing the Bulldog. Allowed to fly most of the sortie - different planet! I want one!!
Even took the radar books home to memorise.

Some years later, top the TWU course and... bastards cancelled the last LTF course.:{:{:{

Bloody holds in flying training:mad:

Got the shiny new AD jet, but wanted the old one.

I doubt I was alone....most fun I've had clothes on or off


..

[BOAC]

Nope, I've read it several times and still don't understand WTF you're on about, PN..... - a real Lightning pilot does:hmm:

[D120A]

And so will the QTR crews, for whom every cough 35 years later has strange AVPIN overtones...:\

[diginagain]

FAO Al R; you wouldn't have a higher res version of the photo in your last post, would you? I think my brother may be in that shot.

[Al R]

Its not the greatest thats for sure, it was scanned in and posted onto Facebook where I lifted it from. I have another somewhere, taken from a different angle on my camera. If your bro is in it, I can put you in touch with the original owner or I might have some more of him in other shots (C Flt, 34 Sqn RAF Regt).

[diginagain]

Thanks for that. The timeframe fits, as ISTR bro was in 34's hierarchy at about that time.

[BEagle]

Sorry, BOAC, it was this which I found perplexing:

On one sortie a colonial was spoofed by the inbound bomber and sent to Recovery. Recovery didn't realise he had been spoofed on to the freq so vectored him back to Luqa.

I'm well aware of the meaning of the rest of the post.

[BOAC]

Which bit - 'Spoofed' or 'recovery? 'Colonial' I assume is a veiled ref to one of the pilots.

Sounds like 360's Cranberries doing the bombing run. Their crowning success was to 'spoof' two RN frigates on to a collision course at night during one of our interminable JMC's and then tell them at about 1 mile:) They were a great squadron. Many a 'fun' jamming/spoofing detail with them.

[Fareastdriver]

Their crowning success was to 'spoof' two RN frigates on to a collision course

Not difficult. Vice-Admiral Tryon managed to do it with two battleships in 1893.

[BEagle]

No, BOAC, it was the scenario - I couldn't work out the distance / time / speed / fuel which would have achieved it, nothwithstanding the impressive QTR.

360 - yes indeed! Many a fun time with them both in my brief F-4 time and on the VC10K. I recall one Coffee Charlie when Neatishead were being as dull as usual. Then along came a couple of Cranberries playing music. During one break in their game, a voice was heard to say "Please give us back the music, it stops us having to listen to that dull git!".

But anyone who'd flown a Hunter could easily recognise the background noise of an Avon's generator / inverter on the electrical system, so spoofing to the trained ear wasn't that effective - neither was straight noise jamming. But reading out the Readers' Letters from Mayfair certainly was....:ok: As was a laughing box.

Personally, if I'd ever had the chance, I would have simply replayed some RT which had been recorded on an earlier sortie.....

Best authentication refusal I ever heard about was one day when 'Thrombo' was flying with a certain fightergator who often posts on here. Checking in with Neat, our hero in the back seat duly does the usual intro. "Papa Fox 4/5 Delta in the Golf Hotels, we're Bravo 4 4 zero, Tigerfast plus 10" or words to that effect.

"Shouldn't you authenticate her?" queried Thrombo.
"Authenticate her? Don't need to, mate - I've sh*gged her!" came the response from the back seat.

Anyway, back to more WIWOL yarns, please. By the way, where is 'Porky' these days?

[BOAC]

Not difficult. Vice-Admiral Tryon managed to do it with two battleships in 1893 - from a Canberra on HF?

[BEagle]

Vice-Admiral Tryon managed to do it with two battleships in 1893.

No doubt one of Roger Waitout's ancestors got a bit smart with his sempahore?

Is Roger still serving? All those JMCs when any call to one of HM's war canoes would be answered "Ah.....Roger, wait, out...." :\ Followed by control which could sometimes be less than useful. One on occasion, having twice tried to take him into the Brest FIR, the normally placid VC10K captain advised Roger somewhat frostily "Do that again and we'll be RTB!".

[endevol]

This thread inspired me to dig out my copy of 'Modern Combat Aircraft - the BAC Lightning' by Arthur Reed (pub. 1980) and I found these photos tucked inside. Taken from a Lightning G90 gun camera they show a successfull Redtop intercept on a flare towed behind a Jindivik. The pictures were taken in the mid-eighties at MPC.

Interestingly, we had one MPC where the first 6 Redtops all misfired - not one left the rail. That caused a lot of head scratching. I think that was the trip I had to do a torch test on a live Redtop...and I was the bloke holding the torch. Concentrates the mind, that does, standing about 20 feet in front of a live, armed, powered-up-and-ready-to-go missile and you're the target. Health & Safety must be a modern invention, cos we had none of that in the 80's.

http://i368.photobucket.com/albums/oo121/Endevol/RedTop_1.jpg

http://i368.photobucket.com/albums/oo121/Endevol/RedTop_2.jpg

[CharlieJuliet]

In reply to post 153 - I think that 5 sqn carried out the Malta Adex in 67(Oct according to my log book). Most turnrounds were less than 5 mins (I don't think we rearmed - just changed the amonia bottle), and wheels on to off in 10mins. We had trouble with the bomber stream, from Cyprus, trying to spoof us on the r/t - fortunately we'd brought a WRAF controller from Patrington and we only listened to orders from her after that. I think that we were parked on the Sunspot (?) dispersal just next to the tower and runway threshold - so cockpit scramble times were quick. On one raid the bombers turned round after we were airborne. Madeleina (?) Radar saw this and recalled us to refuel. We we airborne again before the stream had resettled down inbound again. We had fantastic groundcrew who worked all hours to get, and keep, the jets servicable.

[glad rag]

smashing second picture there! Q-OWS on the F3 had it's up sides two videos that still stick in the mind was the harrier gr5 [?] 'winder with it's perfect display of prop nav and a very slow-mo shot of an almost out of energy 'flash drifting in from r-l under the Fresnel lens with all control surfaces fully deflected....oh yeah and watching the frightning chase bending his pitot probe on the pull out [just to keep the OT police happy ;) ]

[klingonbc]

Back to the original question and the response on post 56. I think I am the Wessex mate Arkroyal is talking about. Not a happy time - if any successful WIWOLs want my view - happy to relate ...
Kbc

[Bicster]

Just have to say as the Canberra came up, I did the last operational refuel on the T17 at RAF Wyton. Still wondering to this day if a T17 fried my goolies as I drove my tanker one night onto a pan to top up a Canberra to find an angry Chief Tech running at me, he said they were doing a live fire of the ECM in my direction. Put the wind up me that did. They got the girls to do the ECM live fires in the cockpit as I remember as they had no spuds to fry.

Sorry for the thread drift there, still love the Canberra.

As we used to say on Tanker Pool "try flying without us" ;)

From a former MT Driver :ok:

[ex-fast-jets]

A million years ago, on my first tour Harriers in Germany in the early 70's, I went on a weekend ranger from Wildenrath to Cyprus, using 330 gal external tanks. Very uncomfortable, but occasionally fuel transfer actually worked! It also changed the external profile of the jet to the uninitiated!!

On arrival, to the west of Cyprus, we were intercepted by two Lightnings. Who, after the intercept, asked the controller to "Thank the Canberras for their co-operation"!!!

So much for aircraft recognition!!

But it might have been frightening!!

Had a bit of a blarney that evening in the bar, especially as OC XX Sqn Lightnings in Cyprus was my ex-Sqn Cdr when I was a cadet at Sleaford Tech!!

Enjoyed the moment!!