Canberra Low Flying

[SKYWOLF]

Hi all,

I recently witnessed a Canberra from RAF Marham flying low and circling over an housing estate.

Would any one know if the Canberra does survaillance work for other agencies or contracted to do photographic work for civilian companies?

Or are their activities strictly for military use only?

Thanks.

[Fox3snapshot]

I know a fellow PPruner who will have some answers for you.....especially when it comes to checking out good scuba diving sites from FL470 with happy snaps to boot!


:E

[Woff1965]

I understand that it has been known for the Police to ask the MOD for assistance in finding missing persons, bodies etc

I suppose a high altitude survey with IR linescan ( or whatever the actual sensors are ) is a good way to do this.

However if it was at low level I doubt it was doing any survey work.

Please note this is supposition on my part.

[Fox3snapshot]

They have some squizzy kit on board....from 250 AGL to FL500, don't under-estimate the waskely wabbit!

Fights on, Tapes on!


:cool:

[Jackonicko]

FL500? Is that all? ;)

[Fox3snapshot]

Well, give or take.....just using round numbers, I am sure the PR9 lads see the curviture of the earth every now and then.

:p

[rivetjoint]

Without getting into the hush hush stuff, do Canberra crews ever wear anything but the normal fast jet style flying clothing when flying or aren't they high enough to worry about boiling blood etc?

[Runaway Gun]

What? Do you mean like frilly pink silk knickers, Old Spice, and CFM boots? :p

[The mother alligator]

They were used in the search for the two unfortunate girls who were murdered in Soham. Saw it on the news at the time.

[FJJP]

RJ

When using the Mk 21 regulator above 45,000 ft you need to wear a pressure jerkin - it inflates like 'G' pants. Your ribcage needs the extra pressure support because the regulator delivers oxygen under a lot of extra pressure. Vulcan and Victor crews used to wear them for very high altitude missions, as do the PR9 crews. Flying below 45,000 you don't need the extra support because your lungs can cope with the lower pressure delivered during pressure breathing.

As far as I am aware, no RAF crews wear space-type suits.

[Jackonicko]

There were occasions in the dim and distant past (certainly during the 1960s) when PR9s operated way above 50K, and the crews wore pressure helmets and partial pressure jerkins. I don't know if the full pressure helmets are still used, or available, or why they were necessary, nor at what height, nor when they stopped these very high altitude missions.

The aircraft is still capable of operating at higher altitudes than 50,000 ft, but is restricted to that altitude as its 'service ceiling' due to flying clothing limitations (see above) and perhaps due to concerns about the longevity of the pressure cabin. Pressurisation cycles are a limiting factor in how long these marvellous old ladies can last, which is why the addition of an AAR capability was studied before the last 'unpleasantness'. It promised to allow the aircraft to fly two equivalent sorties on one pressurisation cycle.

I had understood that 50,000 ft was the limit without a jerkin, because you can always descend those 5,000 ft (down to 45K, where it's not required) rapidly enough for their to be no problem.

What a pity that when the PR9 force was downsized from a full Squadron to a flight strength unit that the surplus aircraft were not stored at Cosford, instead of being scrapped or given away to Chile. It was always clear that the PR9 would be hard to replace, and that retaining the noses alone would have allowed the fleet to run on five-to-ten years longer, while retaining the airframes would have increased the fleet life even further.

But then the RAF has a great record of throwing jets away when they have barely scratched their fatigue lives. Tornado GR1s at less than 3,000 hours, Jags with less than 2,000 hours (and then spending millions on propping up older examples of the same aircraft types). As a taxpayer it makes me so pleased that my money is being spent so wisely.

[John (Gary) Cooper]

Want to know about the Canberra?

www.netcomuk.co.uk/~lesb/canberra.html

[Grimweasel]

Any truth in the rumours that certain agencies across the pond keep the old bird flying? Or does the RAF keep all of the intel gained to itself?

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

<<<
But then the RAF has a great record of throwing jets away when they have barely scratched their fatigue lives. Tornado GR1s at less than 3,000 hours
>>>

Yes, I was quite surprised to see, of all things, an ex-RAF Tornado (ZD-something, as I recall) at the USAF Museum at Wright-Patterson AFB, near Dayton, Ohio, when I was there a month or so ago.

[Jackonicko]

Be surprised now that we've chucked away large numbers of jets with 3,000 flying hours left on them. Prepare to be scandalised the day the 142 GR4s need a structural LIFEX to meet their OSD because they're running out of hours.

Grimweasel
It's v sensitive, but my understanding is that the new EO LOROP kit (it's not SYERS, but don't ask how, and it's officially not accurate to describe it as being in any way related to the U-2 kit) was entirely funded by the US (Sam Nunn this time) just like System Three before it, and Robin before that. Mentioning that much is doing no more than repeating what's already in the public domain. Any more than that would probably upset people.

[rivetjoint]

While doing some research on the web a few months ago I was surprised to find a news article (from a Cypriot newspaper I think) where the locals were worried that a night-stopping Canberra at Akrotiri could be used to spy on the host nation. Presumably the black paintwork of a similar type of aircraft often rumoured to be on the island meant they'd never seen and felt worried by it!?