Originally Posted by
Engines
Cats,
I'd like to respond to your last post if I may. There IS something unusual about the Vikings and their airworthiness regime.
First, they have been operated at increased weights, with a series of modifications that the original designers have very probably not underwritten.
Second, they have not been properly serviced or repaired, and documentation to any statement of airworthiness has been inadvertently destroyed.
Third, the organisation responsible for their continuing airworthiness was found to be incapable of carrying out its statutory duties.
They have been badly taken care of, to the point where they posed an intolerable Risk to Life to schoolchildren. I'd say that's a bit unusual. The really, really, big concern has to be this - IS it unusual for the RAF?
Answers on an airworthiness audit survey form, please.
Best Regards as ever to all those putting things right so that the kids can fly safely.
Engines
Many BGA gliders are operated at increased weights - the BGA weight concession - I've no idea by how much it was increased for the Vikings, but if it was as per the BGA concession I can't see that of itself it's a problem. The manual says the maximum weight in either seat is 110kg with a maximum flying weight of 580kg, of which the load is no more than 36%. The BGA non-aerobatic weight concession is 597kg - +3%.
I understand they have not been properly looked after etc., but after Southern Sailplanes have inspected each glider I would hope they have ironed out both any physical problems (removed unapproved mods, re-repaired undocumented repairs etc.), ensured all SBs and ADs are complied with and of course sorted the paperwork.
My big concern is future airworthiness. In the state they leave SS they should be good for the original number of hours. And as you point out, if the RAF cannot maintain a very simple airframe, what is happening with the more complicated stuff? Or is the maintenance of these gliders a purely ATC issue?