Originally Posted by
Mike Metcalf48
IIRC from my Hunter flying back in the day, coarse aileron input at slow speed would cause departure from controlled flight. The resulting spin was quite unstable and thus dangerous outside of the test environment. We ensured pilots were aware of this trap and, if anybody would care to post it, is detailed as a warning in the pilots' notes. So I am not surprised this pilot was neither taught nor had practised recovery from slow speed inverted at the top of a loop (nb this wasn't a loop or even a 'bent loop' BTW). It would have been quite a leap of faith to do so when training in the Hunter. Once this pilot had found himself significantly below his gate (assuming he even was alert to the situation), he had little option. It is possible he could have avoided the ground if he'd flown optimum AOA - light buffet - but with the ground rushing up to him, the natural human reaction would be to pull harder.
I read the AAIB Hunter test report. The evaluated type was a single seat Hunter with an Avon 200. Whilst similar, it is quite a different beast to the 2-seat Avon 100 trainer. It doesn't matter how much you fudge it, it is not going to be representative and cannot be compared. The very capable TP should have known this and ensured a Hunter T7, in the same fit, weight and balance, was used to evaluate. So, I am afraid it is like apples and pears. The fact that the TP safely flew an 'escape manoeuvre' is down to his experience, ability - lots of Hunter time spent spinning, I am told - and pre-flight spin prevention planning on this distinctly different variant.
Perhaps, given the technical findings (ejection seats etc) of the investigation, the TP couldn't find a civil reg T7 he was happy to operate.
Please correct me if Im wrong but I thought the thrust differences between the Avon 100 and the 200 Were compensated for by operating the 200 series engine rpm at 'reduced" rom based on RR data to simulate 100 series thrust during aeros
From my days at Boscombe flight test,when we had some T7s and F6's and FGA9s to play with, the wing, fin and horizontal stab/elevators Of the T7 and "big bore" single seaters were "aerodynamically" the same, there are differences in pylons etc. One of our F6's had one original wing and one "donated" from a T7 that had been reduced to spares.
The report states (can't remember where) that consideration was taken of the aerodynamic effect of the twin seat cockpit vs the single in the test aircraft.
While there may be performance differences i don't think it's anything like as severe as you suggest.