Shackleton tri-cycle undercarriage

[HaveQuick2]

I saw this picture the other day of a tri-cycle undercarriage Shackleton, and was struck by the apparent massive distance between the main wheels and the tail. I wonder why they changed from the tail dragger configuration, and if that caused any major issues?

http://www.ukserials.com/images/ukimages/wr981.jpg

Also, what did that Mini on the right hand side of the picture have balanced on top of it?

Also, why didn't Mr Philip L Jackson manage to zoom in a bit better on the woman near the G spot?

[Wingswinger]

I should think the radome sticking out beneath the rear fuselage is your answer. As to handling - no idea but no doubt someone with shacklebomber time will pop up here soon.

The mini looks like an ice cream van - a very small one!

[TOWTEAMBASE]

Looks like an ice cream van

[salad-dodger]

Also, why didn't Mr Philip L Jackson manage to zoom in a bit better on the woman near the G spot?
The answer to that one will have something to do with the sort of people who take pictures of aircraft!

S-D

[getsometimein]

Reckon because the MR radar hung so low on those frames, the tail wheel wouldn't be able to survive landings as it would need to be 10' long...

Not much weight down the back, all the kit is near the front so I doubt it made handling difficult at all...

[AtomKraft]

Surely that dustbin radome is retractable for T/O & landing?

What I could never understand about the trike Shacks was if the a/c was normally a taildragger, why didn't the trike ones try and sit on their erses all the time? Especially if a few blokes wandered aft.

Love to know how they did that- and I hope it wasn't just by adding lead.

[chevvron]

The mini might be a burger van not an ice cream van.

[ian16th]

Surely that dustbin radome is retractable for T/O & landing?It was supposed to retract, but I witnessed one disintegrate at Luqa in 1959.

The radome had failed to retract, the crew did a spanner job and removed the scanner et al, and then landed. The radome was the first part of the a/c to touch the runway. It disappeared in the preverbal puff of smoke.

[Hedfanwr]

After some time on the ground the scanner would droop as in this photo. As soon as the hydraulics powered up the radome would fully retract. Thus no problem on the MK2 taildragger for landing.

[scarecrow450]

Saw one at Teesside airshow early 70's and its an ice cream mini.

[Martin the Martian]

The late Chris Ashworth's superb tome on the Shackleton, the long out-of-print Avro's Maritime Heavyweight, is very vague on the reasons for the switch to a tricycle undercarriage, though it does go into detail about the many differences between the MR.2 and MR.3, describing it as structurally similar, but radically different. The inference is that it was part of the general redesign; the bomb bay was shortened to allow room for both the nosewheel and a new ventral hatch, while the new main wheels were positioned at the rear of the undercarriage well and retracted forward. Even allowing for the increased AUW for the MR.3, this was deemed sufficient to position the CoG forward of the main wheels.

Handling does not appear to have been affected, but No.220 Squadron, which re-equipped first with the MR.3 and carried out intensive flying trials, suffered a number of incidents of the nosewheel not lowering. An accompanying photo shows WR976 with its nose on the ground at St. Moggie with half a dozen or so bods standing under the raised rear fuselage. Obviously no worries about the CoG there!

Those I have known who have built the old Frog Shack MR.3 in 1/72 have filled the forward fuselage with whatever they can find to make it stand on its nosewheel. Does make you think about how much was crammed into the real thing, though I guess the nosewheel itself would have added a lot of weight.

[Courtney Mil]

I think the radome first appeared on the Mk2s (taildragger). They went to nosewheel on the Mk3 because it was bigger than the 1 and 2. When they added to forward radome to make the AEW, they had to go back to the Mk2.

Edit: Confession. I still think it's a lovely looking aircraft.

[pkam]

This book is available from a booksite beggining with A and not a river!

[Wensleydale]

Would the tricycle undercarrage place the airframe into a better position for the Viper jet engines used for take-off? I also assume that the Mk3 had a steering nose wheel rather than a castering tail wheel, and this would have helped both ground handling and stability during the take-off run with all 6 engines going.

The Mk2 was chosen for AEW because the airframes were available that had a longer fatigue life left than the Mk3. It was known to get a "cocked" tail wheel on landing a Mk2 if the aircraft was not firmly put down, and the crew sometimes had to manually straighten it in the air after a roller. It was also known for the wheel to caster sideways and remain there during the landing - the result was often a set of burst and shredded rear tyres and a broken wheel rim.

[Martin the Martian]

The radome on the MR.2 and MR.3 is identical in size.

The Mk2 was chosen for AEW conversion as, again according to Ashworth, the heavier weight of the MR.3 had eaten into its fatigue life much quicker, while a number of MR.2s had been re-sparred and had their wings re-skinned under the Phase III modification.

But you are right, Courtney; it is a beautiful looking aircraft. Ugly and lumpy as heck, but beautiful.

[Martin the Martian]

Wensleydale-

The MR.3's inner nacelles were redesigned to house the new main undercarriage legs, with provision for a Napier rocket motor in the rear of the nacelle for use in tropical climes. That would have made an entertaining sight. It was ideal space for the Viper later on. Whether it was part of the reason I can't say. The nosewheel was fully steerable at the RAF's insistence. Avro thought it was unnecessary, interestingly.

[Q-RTF-X]

I don't know if it was a strong factor in the shift to a tricycle u/c but, the change provided an opportunity that allowed a total upgrade of the bomb/weapons bay configuration from what had basically been a Lancaster generation WWII fit to a modern system that was similar in more than a few respects to the Vulcan (same stable anyhow). I worked on Vulcans but never Shacks (apart from occasional transits without a weapons consideration); I was familiar from training with both Shack weapons systems. Without the benefit of any 'hands on' I would be inclined to suggest the Mk 3 was a major improvement when it came to loading/off-loading weapons housed in the bomb bay. Standing by to be corrected by those with experience.

[54Phan]

And yes, it is a beautiful aircraft!

54Phan, who has "been there", as a plastic modeller and aircraft photographer.

[pmills575]

It is rumoured that the primary reason for changing to a tricycle undercarriage was to help export sales. When the SAA expressed an interest it wanted a tricycle U/C not a tail dragger. There a many changes between MR2 and MR3. the wings are different, the MK3 having the Argosy wing and effective ailerons.
The change of main gear was effected by moving the attachment points from the front to the rear spar.

The Vipers were fitted to outboard nacelles.
The first pilot had an additional "spectacle" to operate the nosewheel steering.

The AUW of the MK3 eventually exceeded 108,000 lbs. (MK1 86,000 lbs)

Mk2 and Mk3 were the same length 87.3 ft.

Radome had four postitions up, 1st search, 2nd search and attack, there was an interlock switch on the U/C which selected up when the U/C was lowered.

pm575

[Buster Hyman]

Re the mini...I think you'll find that the Pope was visiting that day.

[Blacksheep]

The extra two engines shifted the CoG well forward compared to the four engined Mk.2.

[PeregrineW]

It was only the MR3 Phase 3 that had the Vipers...Phases 1 and 2 were 4 x Griffon only. Phase 3 mods weren't carried out until around 1965, the MR3 first entered service in 1957 ish.

[aw ditor]

The Mk 3 was a better "turner" than the earlier Marks. ISTR with the new wing came spring tab ailerons. It was also fitted with "stall warning", (stick shaker) a Mk 3 prototype was lost' during early stalling trials. The nosewheel steering was excellent in spite of the unusual mini spectacle control system. The Phase 3 with the Vipers used to go like the clappers in the cruise' with four-turning and two-burning, or so I was told? Smaller bombay' resulted in a smaller war load', less DCs' than the Mk1 and 2.

A.D.

[CoffmanStarter]

A great looking ... real aeroplane :ok:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Avro_Shackleton.svg

[Haraka]

First of all the "Phase Three" wasn't the Vipers. There were Shack 2 " Phase Threes".
Unfortunately the increased runway length requirement of the Mk3 resulted in St.Eval closing and handing over to St.Mawgan.
And, while I'm at it, the drawings above are way out , not reflecting the totally different (thinner) nose profile of the "2" compared to that of the "3".
P.S. Sorry Courtney, the nose wasn't longer. The funny "periscope" aerial was of course for the beast diving underwater and hunting submarines!

[Courtney Mil]

It took me until Mrs C's bar had been open for 30 minutes to realise that they went for the tricycle undercarriage simply because it looks so much better; as proved by the illustrations above. Same reason for the longer nose and the big spark plug on the top.

[CoffmanStarter]

The proposed Mk4 wold have been a good looker too ... someone remind me why we didn't get it.

http://avroshackleton.com/mark4_files/image002.jpg

[Pontius Navigator]

And my suggestion for the guy with the bike is Simon Baldwin.

[Tinribs]

Not really part of this thread but may be of allied interest

It was always said the Canberra nose wheel was a copy of the Shack tail wheel. Caused all sorts of trouble over the years

The Canberra nose wheel sometimes failed to retract entirely leading to a nose red remaining. At least one crew got distracted by this and crashed disorientated. WR 100

[Wensleydale]

it looks so much better; as proved by the illustrations above. Same reason
for the longer nose and the big spark plug on the top.


The 8 Sqn groundcrew possessed a very large clockwork key that they occassionally used to attach to the top of the spark plug and wind up before the crew started engines at air displays etc....

[oxenos]

"Canberra nose wheel"
Shackleton WR963, at Coventry, has just had a cracked tailwheel casting replaced with one from a Canberra nosewheel.

[Richard Woods]

There is only a few detail differences in the fittings attached. The lower part of the oleo is slightly different as the Canberra item is machined for the fitment of mudguards, where as the Shackleton item just has a blank unmachined face. The fixing at the top has to be changed for the centering bar fitted to Shackletons, and a longer torque tube fitted for the gear door actuating rods.

[PeregrineW]

Now, why can't I get a detailed, easily understood answer like that when I ask a techie question on a car forum? This is the place to come for answers, folks...respect! :ok:

Now, do you know an easy way to get an alternator off a 1997 Jaguar XJ6 3.2? ;)

[Richard Woods]

Get it on ramps, and access is easy from underneath. No air pump or injection system in the way, though getting it past the anti roll bar is a bit tricky. The XJR6 is harder. :ok:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

the wings are different, the MK3 having the Argosy wing

Well, actually, the Argosy had a Shackleton type wing. AVRO designed the AW 650 mainplane based on the Shackleton 3's mainplane and gave it the AVR Type No 733. As I remember it, HS Aviation formed their AVRO Whitworth Division shortly after that.

The artist's impression of the proposed Shackleton 4 is interesting but doesn't quite conjur up the sound of 4 Napier Nomads in close formation. I think the Air Staff had their minds set on jets by then, though.

[Shack37]

Haraka

First of all the "Phase Three" wasn't the Vipers. There were Shack 2 " Phase
Threes". Unfortunately the increased runway length requirement of the Mk3
resulted in St.Eval closing and handing over to St.Mawgan. And, while I'm at
it, the drawings above are way out , not reflecting the totally different
(thinner) nose profile of the "2" compared to that of the "3".


I think you're mixing up some different times here. The age of the Phase 3's was many years after St.Eval closed. The first Mk. 3's were many years before the Phase 3's. The closing of St. Eval and Phase 3 Shacks were many years apart.

[diginagain]

Saw one at Teesside airshow early 70's and its an ice cream mini. Spotter!!!

[NutLoose]

Spare a thought for the poor old girl still clinging on to life at Long Marston, if you want to see more just google Long Marston Shackleton..

:(

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8194/8398345055_2f34c6a3fe.jpg

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcToj7EKlu1s1sHnQgJ_KvCjZxTIaYQLlSrAaKZaloN IK0hrNjcd

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8471/8131549384_a9d47947a0_z.jpg

[Haraka]

I think one of the problems with the projected Shack 4 ( as distinct from the T Mk.4 :) )was with the Napier Nomad - allegedly so efficient that it couldn't be got to run.
For Shack 37's benefit, the Mk.3 first flew in September 1955, some time before St. Eval closed IIRC. I presume he was misreading Mk.3 and Phase 3.
Those familiar with the Mk.2 (which I am not) would remember the cocked tailwheel problem, when such a condition post take off would result in the whole undercarriage assembly failing to retract. I remember at St.Eval, in the early 50's, watching a Mk.2 droning around for hours in this condition. Eventually, now down to landing weight presumably, it came in.
Unfortunately the u/c was still selected "up" and as the tailwheels touched (and straightened ...........)
The shower of sparks was a sight to behold.
Further to that there is of course the story of the initial in -flight remedy carried out by a signaller, who apparently belted a hole in the fuselage lower skin with a fire axe and then knocked the tailwheels into line with a towbar.

[Pontius Navigator]

First of all the "Phase Three" wasn't the Vipers. There were Shack 2 " Phase Threes".

Unfortunately the increased runway length requirement of the Mk3 resulted in St.Eval closing and handing over to St.Mawgan.

Is it just me? The above makes perfect sense, as does The age of the Phase 3's was many years after St.Eval closed. The first Mk. 3's were many years before the Phase 3's. The closing of St. Eval and Phase 3 Shacks were many years apart.

[Wensleydale]

Those familiar with the Mk.2 (which I am not) would remember the cocked
tailwheel problem, when such a condition post take off would result in the whole
undercarriage assembly failing to retract


The solution was a T-bar spanner that could be connected to the tail wheel via a socket on the floor of the rear fuselage. Many happy times were spent trying to centralise a cocked tail wheel - the T-bar took a great deal of force to operate, however once the wheel moved it very quickly rotated - usually with the result that the wheel moved 180 degrees into a position 90 degrees out of kilter the other way - start again and back it went, cocked in the original position!

Another way to stop the undercarriage operating was to throw chaff out of the flare shoot in the fuselage floor. Apparently. it would suck up into the rear wheel bay and foul the electrics. (We had to resort to throwing the chaff out of the beam windows).

[BEagle]

...the Napier Nomad - allegedly so efficient that it couldn't be got to run....


When you and I were studying Applied Chipmunkery with the occasional bout of university lectures, Haraka, there was a complete Napier Nomad in the basement of the Aero Eng department at Queen Mary College. I can't recall whether it was a Mk 1 or Mk 2. Perhaps it's still there - it weighed over 3500 lbs, so wouldn't have been easy to shift.

Nomads did run, but were rather temperamental. Such a heavy, complex combined piston diesel and turbine design was soon superseded by the rather simpler turboprop.

It used to be said that no other engine ever achieved such an impressive specific fuel consumption as the Nomad. But I wonder what on earth it sounded like? Particularly all 4 running flat out, had the proposed Shackleton MR4 ever entered service.

Incidentally, 220 Sqn at RAF St. Eval received its first MR3 in 1957. The Sqn was renumbered as 201 Sqn and moved to RAF St. Mawgan in 1958. RAF St. Eval closed in March 1959. Shackleton MR3s were converted to Phase 1 in late 1959, to Phase 2 in 1963 and to Phase 3 in 1965.

[Haraka]

Hi Beags,
All my shots of the ,unflown, Nomad trial installation on the Shack Mk.1 ( ex-Haraka snr who went to Napiers' for a while) were donated, along with a load of other material indirectly ( via the Medmenham Club) to Shuttleworths when I left U.K. . They might still be at Old Warden.

[Blacksheep]

A former colleague went on to Lancasters at St. Mawgen when he graduated from Halton in '57.

[BEagle]

Hi Haraka! Yes, the only photo I've been able to find of a Nomad installed in a Shack is this one from 1955:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/Nomad_zps4c6363e1.jpg

I gather that 2 airworthy Nomads were fitted to a Shack at Luton in 1954, but never flew as the project was binned.

[Haraka]

Indeed Beags.
They were and it was IIRC.!
I did see it as a little lad at Luton ( along with Jean Batten's Gull, the P.74 helicopter, the Eland Convair Liner, etc.etc.)

[BEagle]

...the P.74 helicopter...

'Helicopter' is perhaps rather a charitable description of a device which, despite full power and maximum upness on the collective, refused point blank to leave the ground...

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/P74_zps8f6ca4af.jpg

The original non-flying pig?

[NutLoose]

Oddly enough was looking at a picture of the HP.72 ? of late, had a sad end Beags, eventually laid down to die. At Luton as well, so wonder if that was were seen as a young lad by Haraka.

The control stick from the HP.72 was certainly the rarest that I have owned.

The scrap dealer gas-axed it off for me while I waited and I strapped to the cross bar of my bicycle and headed for home.

That would be Luton c.1958.

It was of tubular construction and looked like a sickle, about 2"diameter tube with a 24" radius with a dedicated grip and a push button on the top. It was painted in a light colour. Ring any bells?

I donated it to Newark Air Museum in the early 1970's...and it has never been seen since.

Mark


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v634/Mark12/HuntingPercivalP74Lutonc1958PeterArnold01-001_zps8b51aff6.jpg

From

Your Favourite Control column stick/yoke/grip! - Page 7 - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums (http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=121888&page=7)

[Haraka]

I don't want to create thread drift , however Hunting's got Ron Gellatly ( later of Rotodyne fame) to try to fly the P.74. It scared him Sh*tless.
The cyclic thrashed around like a demented coffee grinder and he tried desperately to restrain it from causing him physical injury. As he needed both hands for this , he couldn't get a hand free for a long time to switch the thing off. As Beags has pointed out - it simply wouldn't fly.
When all hope was lost the P.74 was finally towed back into the shed ,with the design team following behind in a column, heads bowed as in a funeral procession.

Now the Rotodyne on the other hand........

[Hueymeister]

Went to Long Marston today. All the ac are looking really sad, if they're not rescued soon they'll be fit for nothing....:(

[NutLoose]

Unfortunately a lot were saved and a lot came to the museum at East Midlands, those that were difficult to move are those that remain, such a sad sight.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Not quite thread drift, I think but as this may have the attention of a fair number of Shackleton fitters/riggers, how easy or difficult would it be to connect the aileron circuit to function in the wrong sense? ie anti-clockwise spectacles giving right bank.

[TBM-Legend]

Now the P-2 was a looker and the P-3 is 50+....

[Shackman]

For Haraka, Wensleydale et al:

The cocked tailwheel on the Mk 2after take off was easy to discover (no u/c retraction), and fairly easy to remedy with the patented Avro Tailwheel Straightening Tool - clipped to the side of the fuselage just next to the Elsan. Unfortunately it could also happen after selecting u/c Down but before touchdown. Most times you wouldn't know anything about it, since the usual slight bounce on touchdown was enough to straighten it anyway; however, sometimes you could do a really immaculate landing:-

The Skid (note all the way down the centreline until the tower shouted I was on fire !!!!)
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8102/8502515443_9201e772d8_b.jpg

The end result -

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8225/8502516187_84e67c93c0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22827330@N04/8502516187/)


A Friday afternoon at Coningsby, just after a taceval survival scramble by the F4 fleet. We closed the runway, and the only div was Leeming (a very long bus ride away). We were not popular!!!! Particularly since there was an extra special dining in night that night with lots of veterans etc in attendance.

[Pontius Navigator]

Cocked tail wheel for landing seemed to be more common IIRC. And Coningsby should have invited 8 to the dining in :}

What year was that? I think is was '82 that I was at Coningsby for a Priory.

[Shackman]

Hi PN

April '75, and we were declared persona non grata by the staish, so went to hide in the pub in the village - flew out wheels down and locked following day back to Lossie thanks to hard work by GC's who drove down overnight.

[Haraka]

Shackman:
So it was you was it?
See your PM's

[Herod]

Shackman. Nicely on the centreline though. :D

[mike rondot]

The Long Marston aircraft is a good reminder of the fantastic job being done at Coventry with WR963. Here she is in the late 1970s/early 1980s.

http://www.collectair.co.uk/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/af9a73760fce56b264b2d140946f7653/a/v/avro-shackleton.jpg

Does anyone know if John Elias is still with us?

[Pontius Navigator]

Hi Mike, according to Search for People, Businesses and Places - 192.com (http://www.192.com/people/search/) he is on the electoral register for 2013.

[mike rondot]

Thanks for the link PN, but where?

[Shackman]

Nice one Mike - I hadn't seen that one before.

[grizz]

Still in Forres, Elgin area, or he was about 18 months ago, when I last saw him.

[WASALOADIE]

Coincidently I've been sent the link to the SAAF museum which I notice has a Shackleton with trycycle undercarraige. Here's the link:
Avro Shackleton | South African Air Force Museum (http://www.saafmuseum.org.za/images/avro-shackelton/)

[ian16th]

The SAAF Museum has 2 Shackleton's.

The one indicated in Wasaloadie's posting is at AFB Ysterplaat (Cape Town) and until very recently was airworthy. I believe that it is now 'out of hours'. But last year, for the SAAFA Conference they managed to get all 4 motors running for a 'ground run'.

The other a/c is at the SAAF Museum at AFB Swartkop (Pretoria) and is very much on 'static display' in the open. The last time I visited it looked very sad.

Note to pmills575 (http://www.pprune.org/members/88243-pmills575)

I trust that your:
When the SAA expressed an interest it wanted a tricycle U/C not a tail dragger.
Was a typo and not a Freudian slip :ok:

[Shackman]

Whilst holding prior to MOTU I had the pleasure to work at HQCC, Northwood. One of my duties (jobs) was to sort out the Coastal Command Archive, which included the initial command formation documents, all the copies of the CC Digest of WWII and beyond, and lots of other information regarding equipment, re-equipment, re-re-equipment etc, including those pertaining to the Shackleton and its replacement. Naturally as a curious young Pilot Officer I read everything I could, and whilst I didn’t necessarily understand all I read, this is the gist of it. Unfortunately I cannot give you chapter or verse, or even prove any of it, as the old Officers’ Mess, which included the above ground HQCC and all the Coastal Command memorabilia (including the Archive), was destroyed in a fire in early 1969.

Anyway, back to the MR2/MR3 story. For its time, the MR2 Shackleton was an extremely effective aircraft, and a major step up from the Lancaster/Sunderland fleet it was replacing. So good that AVRO were tasked to come up with an even better replacement, and they came up with a new design with new avionics, even better range and the ability to carry even more fuel/payload etc. IIRC it looked something like the ‘Mk 4’ in CoffmanStarter’s pic on P2.

At this point the dead hand of the Treasury stepped in, who refused point blank to allow a ‘replacement’ for an aircraft (The Mk 2) that had barely entered service.

However, it appeared they would authorise further upgrades to the present fleet, which was being modernised at a great rate thanks to the cold war and the soviet submarine threat. Thus AVRO went back to the drawing board and came up with the Mk 3, which was essentially the new wing, the original engines and married to the same fuselage with all the modern electrics and avionics. The tricycle undercarriage was introduced because it came with the wing design and made loading the bomb bay easier, although getting the nosewheel in meant doing away (again IIRC) with the forward escape hatch. As the aircraft was called the Shackleton Mk 3, and looked very similar, it was duly approved by the treasury, and production was authorised almost immediately. As an aside, having flown both 2’s and 3’s, there was almost no difference internally for the crew apart from the cockpit, which was much quieter and had a better autopilot (and of course nosewheel steering), handling was better, and externally I thought it was the same width. Unfortunately, its biggest weakness appeared to be the nosewheel, with a good number of failures to extend in the early days. Also, as alluded to elsewhere, it started as a much heavier aircraft than the Mk 2, and with equipment growth soon needed even more power, hence the introduction of the two extra Viper jets in the outboard engine nacelles.

There were also some papers regarding the subsequent competition for the Shackleton replacement competition, which ended up with the Nimrod being selected. One of the most striking designs I saw was that of a ‘flying wing’, but others included both propeller (turbine) and jet propositions. Unfortunately I didn’t read too closely about the flying wing, apart from it seemed to have better performance, handling and payload than the Nimrod, but was deemed too much of a technological advance so was rejected. I’ve not been able to find anything about this since, not even the designer/company involved, although the B2 bears a passing similarity

[Ubehagligpolitiker]

The move to St Mawgan was precipitated by runway subsidence at St Eval. Initially, vipers were only used for take-off and could thrust for 3 minutes-ish as use of AVGAS caused high JPT - later after one or two incidents involving loss of Griffons in flight we were cleared to use the vipers in the cruise which was a good way to cut down sortie lengths as they gobbled up the gas.

[pmills575]

Yeah ian16th that certainly was a typo on my part!

It is often believed that the Vipers were originally part of Ph3, in fact some MK3's were updated to Ph3 without Vipers. They were later returned for the fit to be installed. The Viper was a separate add-on that eventually got rolled into the Ph3 programme.

Later mods to the Viper throttle system replaced the two switch idle/max with an inching system that allowed any rpm to be selected. The real issue was the small amount of oil that was carried.


pm575

[Haraka]

Purely second hand , I gather the SAAF Shackleton 3's were effectively Phase Threes without the Vipers.
N.B. there is (was) of course still most of a third SAAF Shackleton sitting out in the desert in north-west Africa. ........

[Rossian]

To back up grizz's remark - John is still well and living near Forres. He is a regular attendee at the monthly meetings of the boring old maritime farts in the Beastie. He is still interested in the minutiae of aviation and has a store of wisdom and tales of derring-do.


The Ancient Mariner

[aw ditor]

For info.' please, what time/day is the meeting at the Red Beasty?

A.D.

[BEagle]

There's some more info here about the crash of Pelican 16 in the desert AvCom • View topic - More pics (17 July) of Shackleton 1716 in the Sahara Desert (http://www.avcom.co.za/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=36307) including comments from the colourful Hartog Blok, mission commander and a thoroughly good bloke who I've met on many occasions.

[mike rondot]

Thanks for that info re John Elias. Now I know he still eats and drinks beer I would very much like to contact him to ask if he ever ventures south.

Can't find him in the phone directory so perhaps you could contact him and ask him to call me...01362 860890.

Many thanks

[ian16th]

Col. Derek Page, No. 1 of 1716 Pelican crew, has recently retired from the SAAF as a Brigadier.

As a Col. he was the Veterans Liaison Officer and worked very closely with the SAAFA and RAFA branches in South Africa.

[Haraka]

That's Derrick Page, who is also a great asset to the Royal Air Forces Officers' Club Johannesberg.

[CoffmanStarter]

We had this interesting little thread running recently ... having subsequently come across this video clip of a 37 Squadron Shack on Bombing Ops out in Radfan Aden 1964 ... I thought others might be interested in a look see :ok:

Bombing and Air to Ground Gunnery ... also some footage of 8 Squadron Hunters doing some Air to Ground Rocketry.

37SQDN RAF Shackleton in action RADFAN ADEN 1964 - YouTube

I don't believe it's been posted before ... sorry if it has :ok:

Best ...

Coff.

[Wander00]

ISTR a n instructor on 1 Sqn at Cranwell, George (Daddy) Etches had won a DFC in Shackletons in the Radfan affair

[Haraka]

He was also an instructor at Henlow in the early 80's on the Junior Officers' Command Course .

[TURIN]

Just watched a documentary on the Shackleton on UK TV. Lot's of old footage and some good gen but no mention of the Vipers. :confused:

It's on again if anyone's interested.


Movies4 Men ch48 02:45 BST 10Jun14

[oldpax]

I was fortunate while an elec mech at BKY to fly in all marks.The first was a MK 3 and there was trouble getting the nosewheel down on that (after a minor service!!).Air test in a MK1 which was departing to become a T4 and then lots of hours on 204 sqdn going to interesting places.All this 54 years ago,I can hardly believe it!!I have a modest collection of shackelton books and lots of the "Growler"magazine to reminisce over!!!