PDA

View Full Version : Has Bruntingthorpe been CAA restricted?


Spot 4
7th Sep 2004, 06:05
I attended the final Bruntingthorpe "Cold War Jets" fast taxi day last sunday (5 Sep) and noticed a distinct change in the displays.

In years past the aircraft would hightail it down the runway and get the nosewheel airborne apparently only killing the speed (and noise!) as V1 approached.

This time, the engines were killed (on all displays) immediately on reaching the end of the somewhat limited crowdline. I appreciate that the gate takings on such days is probably not going to pay for the fuel required, but I wondered if perhaps the "system" had imposed restrictions ordering that all wheels are to remain on terra firma. Does anybody here know any more?

I would have liked to see the "Cockpits" opposite the static line up and available for viewing. Several were parked away under tarpaulins. Some of the traders had massive marquees with lttle inside, though I did enjoy the conversation with, and display of the 2 artists. Catering was a significant improvement over recent events.

Zlin526
7th Sep 2004, 20:35
Why would the CAA get involved? As long as the wheels don't leave the ground, I'm 100% sure they dont have any jurisdiction on a jet powered chunk of engineering!

'The system' is that if the wheels leave the ground, it's an aeroplane and it needs a permit (amongst other things!)

More likely some faggot NIMBY in the locality who doesnt like the noise.

Spot 4
7th Sep 2004, 20:58
I mentioned the CAA because if Lightnings were allowed to get airborne in this country in civilian hands, I am pretty sure that some would. If an over enthusiastic Bruntingthorpe driver got the air between his legs (as it were) then the CAA would be very interested. I would think that the likes of Bruntingthorpe and Cranfield are very much in the CAA spotlight.

.........and whilst they may be lumps of engineering masterclass, they still smell the part, and the noise is incredible when you are sat only a few feet away even with ear defenders on.

Terror_is_firmer
8th Sep 2004, 09:33
Just out of curiosity, Why has the CAA grounded all lightnings it his country as people have shown that they can be maintained to standards. Hunters remain flying so why not English Electrics finest???

jimgriff
8th Sep 2004, 12:46
The lightnings are grounded because if a naughty boy (or girl) flew one with bad deeds in mind, then the RAF has nothing that could catch them!!!

FACT:}

BikerMark
8th Sep 2004, 16:04
Now THAT is a sobering thought, both from the "what if" viewpoint and also a sad reflection on the current capability of the RAF
:ooh:

Moondance
8th Sep 2004, 19:46
I do recall seeing the Vulcan get airborne (by about 12 inches) as the throttles were chopped and the aerodynamic braking commenced, several years ago - the last flight of the Vulcan? (to date)

RileyDove
12th Sep 2004, 19:48
The CAA has never grounded Lightnings ! The last flights in the U.K were in the hands of BAe Systems on delivery(retirement)
flights. An application for a Permit To Fly could be made by an
operator but as it stands at present I believe there isn't an interested party interested in doing so.
The difference in fast taxying and flying a Lightning are quite profound. Similarily the risks involved are completely different.
In order to operate a Lightning in the U.K you would need a solid operational plan and financial backing in the order of 1 million plus. The chances of a Lightning ever operating in the U.K are slim - however if someone wants to try anything is possible.

PFR
12th Sep 2004, 20:40
Moondance,
Anybody got a photo of said Vulcan and those 12 inches. :O . Rumour had it that it was the Southend "beastie", or has it been done twice?:ok:

No comment
12th Sep 2004, 21:50
I do remember a Rolling Thunder weekend at Brunty with '558 seeming rather close to airborne a long while back but it was hard to see with the long grass between the crowdline and runway.

We all decided that she did air herself but of course, she probably didn't!

Blue Helmet
12th Sep 2004, 22:19
Why the Lightnings don't fly.......

The CAA classify ex-mil aircraft into 3 catagories - simple, intermediate and complex. All jets are either intermiediate or complex (see CAP 632 downloadable from CAA website).

The jets flying at the moment such as the JPs, Hunter, Gnat, Vixen(!!) are in the intermediate catagory and therefore can be maintained under CAA approved maintenance agreement by and A8-20 approved organisation. The complex catagory aircraft such as the Lightning and Vulcan can only be flown if the manufacturer (or their successor) provides engineering support. The Vulcan may fly as BAE have said they would give such support were lottery funding forthcoming. BAE will not support the Lightning.

I have had it said to me in person from a senior guy in the CAA GAD dept (off the record) that if BAE did they would move the goalposts to prevent it. They are too worried at their PR image and legal liability were one to crash into school / childrens hospital etc!!

They are very expensive to operate - who would pay? There are a few rich guys that would pay but would want to fly them but could they reach the required standard etc etc. Who would teach them and a 2 seater would be required for proficiency checks etc.

My original JP instructor was an ex-Lightning pilot and he said they are unreliable and on his squadron on a really bad day on 2 out of 12 would be available for use.

Hope this helps.

doubleu-anker
28th Sep 2004, 13:34
I maybe wrong on this.

I am sure one of the factors in to be considered if the type of A/C were to be given a permit, is the availability of "manual reversion" in the event of a power control failure.

Moondance
28th Sep 2004, 14:37
PFR - no photo sadly, but definitely Bruntingthorpe, about 1995/6.

PFR
30th Sep 2004, 18:14
Thanks Moondance. :ok: Still love to see a "snap" if any readers got one, or knows where one might be lurking :O

No comment
30th Sep 2004, 22:18
I'll happily go with that one! 1995/6 sounds about right. wish i had a shot...