Shackleton Mk 3
)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,809
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
Lovely … real kit, not some anodyne digital stuff. Danny42C would relate to that, even though not Kipper fleet.
You learn to make it 'sing' for you, not just leave it to a computer. Serious job satisfaction.
You learn to make it 'sing' for you, not just leave it to a computer. Serious job satisfaction.
Last edited by MPN11; 27th Aug 2013 at 16:57.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,809
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
May one admit to a damp patch? Seriously old kit, needing TLC and skill. 
Had a trip in a Shack once, courtesy of Eric Peck. 8 hours into the sortie, wandering about with my book, I came across the steery bit (bridge?) and noticed a stream of water coming in through the window. The driver, or could have been the cook or cleaner, said - 'I know what you're thinking - no, it's not pressurised.'
..went back to the book, in the front bay window.
wets
..went back to the book, in the front bay window.
wets
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,560
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
I came across the steery bit (bridge?) and noticed a stream of water coming in through the window.
Wearing immersion suit usually kept most of the water out though!
Last edited by Wensleydale; 29th Aug 2013 at 09:27.
That 'mission area' is of course of an AEW version, not a proper Shackleton at all. But you're right about the streams of water pouring in (whether on T/O or the cruise). Naturally when the modifications were done down at Bitteswell to put the AN/APS-20 and associated Gannnet rejects into the aircraft, only the RN specialists had any input, so nothing was done on/to the aircraft to improve 'crew comfort', including replacing the cockpit sealing and a number of other modifications that could have been done virtually for nothing as everything was being taken out and replaced.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,560
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
That 'mission area' is of course of an AEW version, not a proper Shackleton
at all
All of Avro's aircraft leaked badly. On 205 Sqn in Singapore, where crossing the ITCZ meant flying through very heavy rain, considerable amounts of water would enter the aircraft, and a local mod involved drilling holes in the floor to avoid excesive build up.
On ships, water shifting around inside the hull causes instability, usually laterally.(think Herald of Free Enterprise) Also google free surface effect.
On aircraft, the fuselage being long and relatively narrow, the worst effects are in the fore and aft. Those big bits you had to climb over in the Shackleton fuselage, and which they refer to as the main and rear spars, are actually nothing more than baffles to stop the water from rushing back and forth and making the aircraft uncontrollable in pitch.
It is not generally known that Avro built a prototype flying boat to compete for the Specification R.2/33 (which gave rise to the Sunderland). It was built in great secrecy at Woodford, taken in bits to a secret hangar next to the Manchester Ship Canal, and assembled.
Came launch day. It slid down the slipway into the water, and just went on going down, leaving nothing but a few bubbles. The whole thing was hushed up,and Avro never built another flying boat.
On ships, water shifting around inside the hull causes instability, usually laterally.(think Herald of Free Enterprise) Also google free surface effect.
On aircraft, the fuselage being long and relatively narrow, the worst effects are in the fore and aft. Those big bits you had to climb over in the Shackleton fuselage, and which they refer to as the main and rear spars, are actually nothing more than baffles to stop the water from rushing back and forth and making the aircraft uncontrollable in pitch.
It is not generally known that Avro built a prototype flying boat to compete for the Specification R.2/33 (which gave rise to the Sunderland). It was built in great secrecy at Woodford, taken in bits to a secret hangar next to the Manchester Ship Canal, and assembled.
Came launch day. It slid down the slipway into the water, and just went on going down, leaving nothing but a few bubbles. The whole thing was hushed up,and Avro never built another flying boat.
Thank you for reminding me of that mod oxenos - of course you also forgot to mention that it drained into the bomb bay! After ITCZ transits we had to ensure the groundcrew (and occasional senior officer) stood well clear when we opened the bomb doors after landing. The flood we released was known to wash small aircraft away.
Re length of service - I think the 60+ MR2s started Sqn life in 1952, and at least 2 were still flying on 8 when I left in 1976, whereas the 12 AEW2 only started arriving in April 1972 (our first AEW flight was 20 Apr) and the last 6 fiinished in '91.
Re length of service - I think the 60+ MR2s started Sqn life in 1952, and at least 2 were still flying on 8 when I left in 1976, whereas the 12 AEW2 only started arriving in April 1972 (our first AEW flight was 20 Apr) and the last 6 fiinished in '91.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Back on thread (I think).
I met an ex-Shack Mk3 AEOp, then a Vulcan AEO, who was one of the crews at a Farnborough air show that demonstrated the capability of the aircraft to fly for 24 hours.
On the first day a Mk 3 departed. On the second day another departed and the first returned having been airborne for 24 hours.
It had simply flown up and down the Channel at endurance speed. As he wryly observed, they could have flown to St Mawgan, had a few beers, been instructed not to shave, and flown back the next day, but they did fly for 24 hours.
This was in the mid-50s I believe.
I met an ex-Shack Mk3 AEOp, then a Vulcan AEO, who was one of the crews at a Farnborough air show that demonstrated the capability of the aircraft to fly for 24 hours.
On the first day a Mk 3 departed. On the second day another departed and the first returned having been airborne for 24 hours.
It had simply flown up and down the Channel at endurance speed. As he wryly observed, they could have flown to St Mawgan, had a few beers, been instructed not to shave, and flown back the next day, but they did fly for 24 hours.
This was in the mid-50s I believe.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PN, Do you know if they had the capability to top up from a tanker?
I have never seen one with a probe.
I had to have a second take of the picture (video) in #1. I thought that looked a rather modern flat panel display. I think it is a dehumidifier!! Duh..
I have never seen one with a probe.
I had to have a second take of the picture (video) in #1. I thought that looked a rather modern flat panel display. I think it is a dehumidifier!! Duh..
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry BGG I have my serious head on tonite.
I recall seeing early pictures of the Cobham system where the aircraft were connected tail to tail. (yet flying in the same direction). probably Lincolns.
I am sure I will find an authoritive text on the subject somewhere.
I recall seeing early pictures of the Cobham system where the aircraft were connected tail to tail. (yet flying in the same direction). probably Lincolns.
I am sure I will find an authoritive text on the subject somewhere.