Gents,
The majority of the AAR system of MRA4 is retained structure. If anyone is in doubt… check the drawings.
Interpretation of ‘retained’ would seem to be the issue here. Take for example, the refuel Probe –
- The first MRA4 delivered will have a Probe fitted. It is ‘retained’ Structure.
- It may be the probe removed from a Vulcan all those many years ago and hastily fitted to an MR2. It will have been re-furbished. It is retained structure.
- It may or may not be a newly manufactured probe (to MR2 drawings). It is retained structure.
The same goes for all the other ‘retained’ structure. It may be an original part re-furbished or it may be a ‘new’ part manufactured to MR2 drawings. It is retained structure.
No-one is suggesting that the design is in anyway deficient.
Read the shortfatone’s post again and this time read what it says, not what you want it to say.
Quote:
“Where you are not correct is in giving the impression that the fuel pipework et al is refurbished. It is of a similar/same design but, apart from the fuselage (and one or two minor items) the rest of the aircraft (and pipework)is new build. Indeed, around the important areas (engine bays etc) the fuel pipework will be double skinned.”
Nigegilb does not say anything about the
‘fuel pipework et al’ but:
Quote:
“The AAR system on MRA4 is the retained MR2 system. That means what the MR2 has, MRA4 will have also. That said, there are some differences, mainly where that fuel enters tanks in the Bomb Bay.”
“It is not being built to a Civil Standard, and the "fag packet" Falklands design is being adhered to.” This is also correct.
It is also correct to state that in the aftermath of XV230 the MRA4 fuel system has been the subject of some scrutiny, believe me..
Nigegilb is not
'fundamentally wrong' Betty.