Air squadron Bulldogs - a question about speed!

[Camargue]

I spent several happy years learning to the Dog with NUAS from 89-91 and then again when they turned up at civilian flying schools and one thing has always intrigued me.

If I remember flat out was 140kts IAS, nav was flown at 25/25 120kts IAS indicated, 12 gals per hour. None of the civilian versions I have flown get anywhere near this - more like 125kts and 110-115kts at 25/25.

I so my question is this, is my memory wrong or did the Air Squadron versions put out significantly more than 200HP?

thanks!

[RHKAAF]

I flew with UWAS in the seventies and in HongKong in the eighties. The same basic aircraft but different performance due to temperature, humidity, etc.
The annual airtests never came up to the book figures but a superb aircraft
for training. We replaced them with Slingsby Fireflies which were not as rugged but nicer looking.
At UWAS I remember my student putting 6 G's on the meter during a PFL and my boss (Adam Wise) giving me a quick reprimand so that he could tell the AOC that the matter had been dealt with on the squadron. Never heard anymore about it!

[unmanned_droid]

120 knots is right as I recall.

Power settings are something I don't recall as I was usually the kiddy learning to map read.

this site:

Bulldog aircraft specifications and performance (http://www.pilotfriend.com/aircraft%20performance/Beagle/Bulldog.htm)

gives cruise speed at 75% power as 130 knots and econo as 118 knots at 60% power.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Up the Free Northumbrian Air Force, Howay the Lads :ok:

Your memory is correct

[unmanned_droid]

This thread should sort it out if the study guides are still up.

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/479159-bulldog-student-study-guide.html

[Camargue]

I remember one student bending the engine mounts one by pulling 6.5g out of a wing over. but great learning plane and still the easiest to handle in a stiff cross wind.

I also seem to remember our boss Mike Baker air raced and his was tweaked a bit to about 143kt ias.

I also think 100kts was 19" / 2400. but certainly the figures from Pilot friend don't seem right for either military or civi versions.

[Wander00]

RHKAAF - Adam Wise - same Towers Entry - sadly now departed for the crew room in the sky. finished up as an equerry in Buck House, I think to either Prince Andrew or Prince Edward. Certainly in the procession in one of the Royal weddings late 80s. Nice guy, good company

[Mandator]

Camargue: What civvy variant are you flying? If you are flying the Series 100, Model 101, as flown by Ultimate High, they have a pitot head in the wing leading edge and not on the underwing mast like the ex-RAF aircraft (Model 121). Because of position error the indicated speeds are therefore different. For example:

VNE: Model 101 = 169 kt. Model 121 = 185 kt.

VNO: Model 101 = 126 kt. Model 121 = 135 kt.

Note: Model 101 speeds converted from km/hr as quoted in the Flight Manual.

[Camargue]

There were a couple at Old Sarum a while back, one was G-BULL, ex HK and looking at some photo's I found just now pitot is def under wing.

Having said this positioning would explain some of it but looking at the cadet notes put up by dave sawdon (used to own g-bull) some years back they state for example that nav was flown full throttle but the pilots notes I made whilst at nuas say nav 25/2500, 120kts and I am certain 2600 was only ever set for aeros'/stalling/spinning etc and not for cruise.

[Legalapproach]

WanderOO Adam Wise was equerry to HM The Queen.

RHKAAF you well Ceri?

[Wander00]

LA - I think he was firstly an Equerry to HM the Queen, then Private Secretary and Equerry to Prince Andrew (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Andrew,_Duke_of_York) and Prince Edward (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Edward,_Earl_of_Wessex) from 1983 to 1987. He was an ADC to HM the Queen when Station Commander at RAF Benson (and Deputy Captain of the Queen's Flight).

[ABL262]

I fly Bulldog XX553 in "hot and high" southern CA. It's good for about 110-112kts IAS straight-and-level at 4,000ft AMSL with everything forward bar the RPM at 2,600 ... BUT the engine needs an overhaul as it's 2,000 hours since the RAF last opened it up.


I fly Bulldog G-DISA when I'm in the UK (ex-RJAF). It's good for 120+kts IAS straight-and-level at 3,000ft AMSL, again with everything forward and RPM 2,600. Hope this helps.


Regarding Adam Wise, he was our OC at ULAS between 1984 and 1986 and was, at least initially, Royal Equerry to Princes Andrew and Edward. Prince Edward flew with ULAS during Easter Camp at RAF Abingdon in 1984 or 1985 IIRC.


Regards all,


ABL262

[Legalapproach]

If RHKAAF is who I think he is, he sent me on my first Bulldog solo on 21st July 1980. Adam Wise sent me on my second solo the following day after saying "I'm not sitting here any longer while you try to kill me. I've just about saved up enough to buy a replacement one of these so you can carry on on your own."

[Camargue]

Your nos seem to be in line with the what Dog does today but is at a variance with what I remember from UAS days - I am just curious as to why this might be and if there are any ex UAS qfi/cfi 's who could comment!

[Mandator]

Well, if its not position error then all it can be is clapped out engines and propellers.

[NutLoose]

Engine data here

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/cb8eb266e5683e5b86257a09004d8f38/$FILE/1E10%20Rev%2024.pdf

[Crandons]

Yes you are correct ABL262. It was Easter 84. PL came back as one of Prince Edward's instructors and conducted my BHT, curiously enough in XX553.

[ABL262]

I think Mandator has hit the nail on the head.


Original RAF Bulldog engine pool must be getting awfully long-in-the-tooth. ISTR the engine in XX553 has more cumulative hours since factory new than the airframe itself with multiple overhauls during its 40+ year life. So, despite regular service, the engines must be getting a little "wheezy" by now. On the other hand, props should be fine as they were all replaced following a Hartzell AD in the late 90s.


I know a couple of Bulldogs have had more recent vintage engines fitted - Bulldog XX554 and one of the Ultimate Highs. Perhaps Cim Jartner and Greeners, respectively, could provide a before-and-after comparison before we all rush down to the Lycoming factory sale in pursuit of an extra 10kts.

[Mandator]

ABL262: If you could talk to the (now defunct) CAA Flight Department, which used to monitor fleet climb performance based on CofA renewal flight test data, they would have shown you a graph of a steady decline in performance over the past ten years. In RAF days there was no hesitation to change engines, either for defect or immediately on life expiry. In civvy street, engines flog on and on, way over the Lyco TBO (unless operated commercially). A further risk to civvy engines is that many of them have very low utilisation compared to the Dog's time in the military, resulting in heavy internal corrosion and excessive wear, especially of the camshaft. This has a marked effect on the power developed by the engine.

However, people often forget the importance the propeller, not only making sure it is correctly adjusted, but also the effect of years of blending and cropping at the tips due to stone damage operating off grass strips and crumbling WW2 runways. A new Hartzell prop tip is something of a 'paddle blade' and it does a lot of work soaking up the engine's power. Crop or blend that tip (even within R&O limits) and there can be a significant loss of performance.

A blended prop even within R&O limits, which are usually based on sustaining structural integrity of the prop, on a clapped engine may therefore not develop enough grunt for the aircraft to meet its book figures. Already several Bulldogs are carrying performance write-downs in their Flight Manuals because they can't get within the 70 ft/min drop off on the book climb figures allowed by the CAA.

From what everyone here is saying is that the Bulldogs used to whizz along in military service, so the performance drop-off must be a civvy thing. Chaps, look to your engines and propellers.

[squawking 7700]

Airframe too has an effect on performance - every imperfection in the paint, every slight ding in the leading edge or anywhere else all has a cumulative effect.
Lots of these aircraft live outside now rather than cosseted in a hangar and cleaned regularly - a good polish will restore 5kts.


7700

[Madbob]

7700

Very true but don't omit the extra weight of the crew! Back in 1979 when I joined up I was a stude with a personal AUW of 73 kgs, c. 11.5 stones. Now, though it pains me to admit it, I'm more like 93 kgs or 14.5 stones.:oh::oh:

Add to this that all ac seem to put one weight as they age, more layers of paint etc. and as you say minor aerodynamic imperfections it's is hardly surprising that performance drops off.

MB

[hugh flung_dung]

I don't think it can be down to tired engines. We had quite a few 'Dogs at Old Sarum over the years and none felt happy cruising at 120kt - even when I put a new engine in G-BULL a 120kt cruise needed higher than the book power setting, 110-115 felt a lot more comfortable.
FWIW G-BHZT (ex-Botswana, I think) had far the nicest "feel" of any of the 'Dogs that I've flown - and even had hard points and a trigger on the grip:eek:

HFD

[BEagle]

I certainly don't recall using 25/25 for a 120KIAS navex.

2600 rpm / best power mixture / induction air cold, whatever MAP it took and to hell with the fuel consumption!

When we took a 10-ship from RAF Abingdon to RAF St Mawgan, everyone else used the normal 2400 / 19" cruise. I pulled the RPM back, pushed the MAP up to 'parallel needles' and leaned the mixture as far as I dared.....saving at least 3 gallons in the process. But we'd stopped teaching the use of anything less than 2400 rpm by then - and I gather that a few years later 2600 rpm actually became the norm.

[smujsmith]

Beags,

I was a Groundcrew member of UEF at Abingdon, and wonder if the introduction of the "Green Spot" injector might have had an effect on flight settings for performance. As an Airframe fitter, I had no direct involvement or great understanding of the MOD, but, I understood it was done to deal with the tendency to cut the engine under certain loading (a spin ?). Perhaps the introduction of the "Green Spot" made other differences. I know that in my time (77-79) pilots always asked if their aircraft had the MOD. I'm sure operators could probably put this to bed quickly.

Smudge:ok:

[NutLoose]

Well if your all feeling flush

Bulldog at Rutland Water (http://ukga.com/classified/view?contentId=33251)

Ex RAF Bulldog 120 / 121 For Sale (http://ukga.com/classified/view?contentId=33350)

[thing]

Look at book figures for any GA (and I include Bulldog in that obviously) a/c and then laugh as you try and achieve them. Mandator has hit the nail very much on the noggin. We changed the prop on one of our a/c and it gave a ten knot improvement in cruise.

[NutLoose]

Well it would, fixed pitch props unwind over time so need resetting, this is done by re twisting the blades, you can additionally retwist them as cruise props or climb props. One thing I rue the loss of is the three yearly air test, fine until you find when you need it, the thing isn't doing what it says on the tin, the thing the air test used to pick up.

[thing]

Well it would, fixed pitch props unwind over time so need retting, this is done by re twisting the blades, you can additionally retwist them as cruise props or climb props.

Indeed, however as you know in the civvy world cost is all and folk fly with the rattiest (but legal) props that have been touched up, blended in, you name it. To fly an aircraft with a well balanced prop that hasn't been blended in at least a dozen places is a delight.

[Mandator]

Hi Nutty: I had a chuckle when I saw the advert in your second link. Someone I know rang the owner about the aircraft and was told bluntly that the aircraft was not for sale!

[sp6]

Off topic, but mention of Adam Wise & ULAS sparked some old memories. I was a non flying member of ULAS 1985-86, and in a very strange twist of fate have ended up as an AEF staff pilot on Tutors.

Can anyone remind me of the names and what happened to the QFI team from those years? I know the tragic circumstances surrounding Mike Blee, but I would be keen to know who the rest of the team were and what they did after ULAS.

Many thanks SP6

[ABL262]

Hi sp6 - check your PMs - I have listed from my logbook with what I know for each. If there is wider interest, I can publish the list on this thread minus personal info or alternatively contact ULAS alumni organization.


Regards,


ABL262

[smujsmith]

Squawking 7700 #20,

Very true. I well remember a summer camp with OUAS at St Mawgan, when our boss, insisted that the leading edges, wing, fin and tailplane, were cleaned of insects between flights. We did so much that on return to Abingdon all four aircraft had to have re sprays on the leading edges. As an aside, I was fortunate enough to have my name painted on the side of 'Bravo' which was the mount of Flt Lt Mike Blee RIP, who was very kind in offering me many opportunities to share a flight. With a diminishing memory I wonder if anyone can confirm the Serial number of ' Bravo', ISTR XX661 but am not too sure these days.

Smudge:ok:

[longer ron]

ISTR that 661 was indeed 'B' - flew a rudder trim check in her with Flt Lt B...t...te in 1980.

rgds LR

[carlos755]

Hi, I owned two of them, XX668 (G-CBAN) with cliff Hilliker at Colerne and XX657 (ZK-WUF) at Whenuapai. Had heaps of fun in both but never got anywhere near 130 kts+ straight and level, possibly if the old aerials where removed along with the weird strakes around the enormous strobes...
Cheers
Carl