View Full Version : BAC One-Eleven

29th Jan 2007, 11:07
How many still airworthy? Any airline still flying them?

29th Jan 2007, 15:03
Hello World!..

Been itching to say that !!..

Try http://www.bac1-11jet.co.uk/



31st Jan 2007, 11:39
We frequently see (and of course hear) one 1-11 around here (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0963682/L/), it is operated by Empire Test Pilot School.
The 1-11 was the first aircraft, I ever flew on. Back in 1973.... This one (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0739698/L/)

Dr Jekyll
31st Jan 2007, 19:43
I know there have been a few 1'11s fitted out as business jets, but did BAC ever consider a purpose built 'BAC 111BJ'?

It seems to me they could have produced an aircraft equivalent to the Gulfstream jets but at much lower cost due to economies of scale.

1st Feb 2007, 04:30
Most of the North American 1-11s did end up as biz jets (in fact the few still around in the US are). The problem was the very noisy (& thirsty) Spey engines. Dee Howard did convert one to Tays and, from the video I saw shot by an FTE on the program, the noise was much reduced. I often wonder what a 1-11 would be like with BRR 710s or CF-34s - it would probably give a EMB-190 a run for its money.

The design rights were last held by Romaero but I've no idea what happened to them - or the fuselages left on the line in Bucharest. If you do a search in Yahoo Groups there's quite an active site that supports the preserved 400 Series at Hurn and also has most of the news of the type. Latest is that the Omani Air Force, which operates two Type GD (475 Freighter) versions, are looking to replace them with A320s.

1st Feb 2007, 07:40
"the preserved 400 Series at Hurn "

Which one is it and where is it kept? I know the Bournemouth Aviation Museum has a series 500 but I don't know of a 400.

1st Feb 2007, 07:48
A former colleague of mine, who had been Chief Pilot at a flag carrier operating 1-11s, described them as 'machined out of a solid block of aluminium' - indestructible, but very expensive to build.

Incidentally, his opinion of the Viscount (also operated by his airline) was that it was a total lemon, only redeemed by the excellence of its powerplants.

1st Feb 2007, 08:09
Has there in fact ever been a British commercial aircraft that was even halfway decent?? They were all lemons as far as I can see - and some of them (Herald springs to mind) were absolutely dreadful!!

We never did manage to build an aircraft that was really popular with the world's airlines...

Over-engineered?? Old-fashioned practices?? Not listening to the customer?? What???

1st Feb 2007, 11:48
"We never did manage to build an aircraft that was really popular with the world's airlines..."
Let's see... Viscount was 1940s/50s vintage. What else was available:-
DC-6/7 total production - 1042
Connie/Super Connie/Starliner total production - 855
Convair 240/340/440 total production - 933
Considering at the time the dominance of the American market and the
preference for American built aircraft by US airlines I don't think a production run of 444 for the Viscount was at all bad. Certainly NOT a "lemon"!
And that's not even mentioning the Bregeut Deux Pont!! Talk about lemons.

1st Feb 2007, 12:05
Over-engineered?? Old-fashioned practices?? Not listening to the customer?? All of the above, plus actually listening to a funded but unique customer operating in cartel, pooled revenue, where capacity was driven by a distorted market - not until 1979 were Brits allowed to spend their chosen proportion of net, hard-earned cash in foreign currency. Of Brit jettypes only 1-11 was not launched by monopoly Corporations, but by (Fred Laker as) BUA, ahead of the target of US regionals, who did take it - Mohawk, Braniff, then AA. (to be)BA then launched /500, but by then 737/200 and enhanced DC-9s had left it for dead, because BAC/RR would not punt on upgrades.
There were attempts to do Tay /600, then to retrofit it to /500. Some say that would have cannibalised BAe.146, others that (then-nationalised BAe.) just lost all yen for civil after aborted 2-11/3-11 sorties. Better to make bits for other people. If the purpose of building commercial jetliners is to recover all costs with a surplus, then only recently have some models done this after >1,000 sales. UK thought that pilots/engineers bought airliners. Cost per ASM, maintenance man-hours p flight hour...who he?
Wasn't just Brits. Convair did better building 747 lower 41 and DC-10 fuselage barrels, than on CV880/990. Japan bashes metal profitably.

microlight AV8R
1st Feb 2007, 12:16
Vickers (BAC) VC-10
A truly beautiful airliner which provided a level of refinement that was ahead of the field. I travelled back from Aden in a BUA example and still recall being impressed with the smooth flight and quiet cabin thanks to those RR Conways being at the back. the VC-10s ability to operate 'hot & high' was better than the 707 .
Empress of the skies methinks.

My personal view is that we could, indeed did, build some of the finest aircraft in the world. Sadly we lacked the necessary hard nosed commercial approach that is necessary to succeed in the numbers game of big business.

1st Feb 2007, 12:16
So how many are flying. I did see the Rumainian one at SEN last year with its hush kit and its take over noise level seemed no louder than most other jets. In fact I was disappointed.

2nd Feb 2007, 08:27
tornadoken, thanks for that - short, succinct, factual - I learned something!!

microlight av8r - didn't the VC10 drink fuel like it was going out of fashion?? And not terribly many were built for airlines outside the UK...

2nd Feb 2007, 12:01
"didn't the VC10 drink fuel like it was going out of fashion?? "

It did somewhat. And Boeing managed to get hold of an internal BOAC memo comparing the operating costs of the Super VC-10 and the 707 which stated that the Super had a higher sfc than the 707. Boeing immediately showed this statement to prospective customers with a comment like "Even the airline that specified it finds it uneconomic".

What they "ignored" was further information in the report that said that though the sfc was higher wherever a VC-10 operated alongside 707s and DC-8s the load factor on the -10 was about 20 pax greater which more that offset the higher fuel burn. Passengers loved it!

Dan Winterland
2nd Feb 2007, 14:25
I think the memo actaully compared cost per hour which was more than the 707. But as the 10 was considerably faster, the cost of flying it across the Atlantic was about the same. And as mentioned, it was more popular with the passengers. Roomier, smoother and quieter. The 707 dutch rolled it's way across the Atlantic due to it not having a yaw damper making the passengers in the last few rows very queasy. BOAC filled the 10s, it was the 707s which had empty seats due to it being less popular.

2nd Feb 2007, 15:54
AV8R: (UK) sadly lacked the hard nosed commercial approach that is necessary to succeed in the numbers game of big business.
Until 1987 we owned the Corporation Users and paid some of an aircraft type's Certification cost, repayable by Sales Levy. 1977-1985 we paid all of it as we owned BAe. UK State funding of commercial aircraft began in March,1943 with Bristol T.167. Brabazon Committee's remit was to specify "supreme" types, and in D.H.104 Dove and VC2 Viscount they did. UK funded 100% of civil types' R&D until (Viscount Major) Vanguard, on which we spent £0 (because Vickers wanted to keep all the upside {!}). Then Sandys came along - yes, him. In 1960 he introduced 50% Launch Aid for VC10 for BOAC, Trident for BEAC. Ministers did not choose the types - Corpns. did, bespoke. (BUA chose to be 1-11 and BAC pursuaded Ministers to pony up as Caravelle could not, but they could, sell in US).
The rot that blighted UK civil industry was that while BEAC/BOAC awaited their new types, Ministers got fed up with their losses and required Chairmen to try to spell "efficiency". Floundering in unfamiliar economics, doubtless, as AV8R suggests, aided by US brochuremanship, they forecast VC10/Trident with higher aircraft-mile costs than 707/727, and noisily extracted subsidies to compensate their social service, Jobcentre function on "uncompetitive" British aircraft.
It didn't matter what the outcome was, load factor x yield: Corpns. had their cushion, Boeing/Douglas had ample ammunition to deflect UK salesmen. In fact constant 707 operating enhancements offset VC10's smooth ride. A comparison might be Leyland/Rover models resting on laurels of style while dull Japanese motors would resist corrosion parked on wintry streets, and start at first try. BOAC’s last Super VC10 arrived July,’69; last departure was May,’81. Its last 707 arrived in May,1971; last disposal from BA in June,’83, from (BA-)Br.Airtours in June,1984.

3rd Feb 2007, 03:45
My apologies - you're correct it's an ex-BCAL Series 530 according to the museum website. When I saw it a couple of years ago, I was under the impression that it was an ex-Channel aircraft - they had the only 400 Series with twin overwing exits as the IT configuration (99 pax IIRC) demanded it. A test flight (As SLB with the rest of my Apprentice School class) to check the pressurisation systems was the only flight I ever had on a 1-11.

The 1-11 was aimed squarely at the American market. The AUW was at the then maximum allowed with just two crew. The airlines that took them also included United, Aloha & Alleghany. I still have a marketing brochure that details a day's flights for a Braniff aircraft going from Love Field all around Texas and making a profit on every leg even when the number of pax was down to about 30 (the Mail subsidy really covered the expenses).

It's funny, I was reading a press release yesterday for Bombardier's proposed C-Series which said the ideal regional was 5-abreast seating and 110 pax - same as the 500!

3rd Feb 2007, 07:12
"The 707 dutch rolled it's way across the Atlantic due to it not having a yaw damper....."

Anybody like to comment ?
( I thought they all had them - obviously mistaken )

3rd Feb 2007, 10:20
Well, "its" should not have an apostrophe in it, for a start.
My understanding is that the yaw damper on a 707 was perhaps not as effective as it needed to be. I have read somewhere before that travel in the last few rows was likened to "being in a washing machine", although honestly don't remember it that way myself.

Midland 331
3rd Feb 2007, 11:37
Was this due to a gentle flexing of the fuselage, as in the 757?

I'm sure that the "tubes" were about the same length.

Sitting in an aisle row at the very back gave a most interesting view!


3rd Feb 2007, 12:13
I don't wan't to cause a significant thread drift from the 1-11 topic but I was led to believe that the 707 /KC-135 family all had a Stability Augmentation System:originally evolved from one first first developed to cure severe dutch rolling inherent in the B-47. Perhaps somebody with first-hand fleet experience could comment or clear this one up?

3rd Feb 2007, 12:27
E3 aircraft have two yaw damper systems, a series yaw damper as the primary and a parallel yaw damper as a back up. Both systems must be serviceable before flight.

3rd Feb 2007, 14:13
all the 707s had yaw dampping, the early ones had parallel and the 300s had series if I remember correctly.
you are correct the back of the A/C looked very intresting from the front of the cabin.

3rd Feb 2007, 15:03
Despite the earlier rather unkind and disparaging reference to the Herald, this aeroplane was in the early stages of further development until the demise of HP, on the drawing board were;
HP127, a modified Herald with two RR Speys in under wing pods.
HP125, a military type Herald with 18 vertical lift RR RB162 jets in pods under the wings.
HP 132 Herald with uprated Darts plus two GE CF700 turbo fans in wing tip pods.
There were other military/cargo type variants, but the ones above do stir the imagination! yes, the Herald was a little over British, but not dreadful, did the job and was a very good freighter for many years,
best regards,

4th Feb 2007, 11:34
I used to work for DanAir in the late 80's early 90's and one of my summer roles was supplying demineralised water for the water injection system on the 1-11, had great fun tootling around LGW in my ancient water bowser filling the tanks or chucking barrels onboard for the return leg:)

Midland 331
4th Feb 2007, 12:25
Midland ran them circa '69-'70, and I recall going with my dad to Castle Donington Power Station to collect supplies.

Dad was always a bit miffed that it was dumped soon after departure....


Ye Olde Pilot
5th Feb 2007, 00:58
The ill fated Welsh airline Airways Cymru launched with an old 1-11 in the late 80's. Despite the hush kit it was still very noisy.

I'm not sure if choosing old 1-11's was a good business move. They were always breaking down.

G-WLAD parked on the old stand 13 at EGFF (Cardiff)

Amos Keeto
5th Feb 2007, 12:14
One-Elevens still flying - not many. Here in UK, there are three which all fly from Boscombe Down - Srs.432s ZE432 with ETPS, ZE433 with Tyhoon's nose radar and Series 500 ZH563 also on radar trails. There are one or two still in Romania, I believe, the Oman Air Force still has three and there are a few executive 1-11s around in the States and possibly in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia etc.

6th Feb 2007, 03:47
Bet you remember this then..


The hump on 09/27 caused some uncomfortable nosewheel bouncing on that 1-11.

Midland 331
6th Feb 2007, 07:30
I once heard a story of it arriving at Leeds on 27 "firmly", and all the oxygen masks deploying. Welcome to Leeds. Can 27 accept a 1-11?


6th Feb 2007, 10:45
OM15: Herald not dreadful (wandering a bit, but WTH). What separated 1950s' Brit sites from, say Fokker, who thrashed Herald in the marketplace, was not skill, but focus. I visited Radlett in 1962: 3 lines in the same Listed (listing) shed had Hastings on Major Service, new-build and Autoland-retrofit Victor B.2, and Herald new build. Try to imagine yourself as Works Manager at shift change, moving bodies, tools, parts, grubby paper! Multi-tasking or what? Part-BEAC-owned Aer Lingus was F.27 Launch Customer, rejecting HP in part due to Fokker chasing harder for the business.
All 3 types had 1947 in common - when Victor was schemed and bid, Hastings was in flight trials, and (to be H.P.R.3 Herald) Miles M.73 was designed with 4xAlvis Leonides, because Dart then had no funding and ASM Mamba was hurting (to be H.P.R.1) M.60 Marathon.

6th Feb 2007, 19:09
The Omani Air Force 1-11's are unusual in that they have the rough field u/c. One of them was converted to a PCF fit, the belly holds being converted to fuel tanks so that it could transit Oman-UK with just one tech stop.

I believe they (1-11s in general) don't have a fatigue life...???

7th Feb 2007, 11:18
If you didnt get the aircraft down on RW27 Jersey pretty bl**dy quick then there was a surprise waiting for you at the other end. A CLIFF ! And as for those drop down oxygen masks - WHAT DROP DOWN MASKS????? The BCal 500 series didnt have them and were restricted to a cruise altitude of FL350 (as a result) as far as I remember. That water injection system was a joy until the water ran out and you got that sinking feeling and dont even mention the WIFFLE tree.:ugh: It was a great aeroplane to fly:ok:

7th Feb 2007, 18:18
I could swear I was still seeing the raf operating this plane at dulles as late as 1998.

It's always fun to watch people wearing ear protection try to clamp them ever tighter as the plane taxis about the ramp at signature.

7th Feb 2007, 20:30
It's always fun to watch people wearing ear protection try to clamp them ever tighter as the plane taxis about the ramp at signature.

You wanna try standing under the #2 eng when it's being run at full power! Lucky I had ear defenders with me that day:ok:

7th Feb 2007, 22:59
Fly 380

I'm afraid your memory is at fault! All 1-11s had drop-down masks.
This was/is a certification requirement for flight above FL250. The maximum permitted FL350 was due to the max pressure diff. of 7.5 psi.
Should one make a (hardish) landing, the over-sensitive g-switches on the mask doors would operate, alloowing the rubber jungle to deploy. The general rule was, "if you dropped'em, you re-stowed 'em". Obviously your landings were pretty good!
Brilliant aircraft to fly, I agree, particulaly with the drooped l/e of the 500s allowing a straight climb to 350, even at max TOW!

8th Feb 2007, 02:59
I'm afraid your memory is at fault! All 1-11s had drop-down masks.


I did 14 years, flying 6,000 hours and 6,000 sectors on the "Super 1-11" and I can assure you there were no drop down masks. As Fly 380 correctly said it was consequently limited to 350.

Although it would indeed go directly to FL350 at max weight it was actually outside it's performance parameters to do so - however "coffin corner" wasn't much considered in short-haul jets those days! (Also the Super was artificially MTOW limited to save on landing charges until it's last few years).

The S1-11 did do pretty good autolands though, considering the avionics fit, it was certified to CAT IIIA with a single autopilot and duplex monitors. I remember a magic box at the rear of the cockpit which lit up a series of numbers to denote the fault which had made it throw the autopilot out. However the half dozen or so genuine CATIII approaches I made worked perfectly, it was the practices that went pear shaped usually.

It also had one of the earliest RNAV fits (before that term was coined) in the name of HARCO. A moving map driven by Decca it could be coupled to the autopilot and waypoints fed in from a turret holding a dozen or so. when it was working it was great but in the Berlin Corridors in bad weather it had a nasty habit of jumping a lane and causing the US controllers there a heart attack in the process with loud cries of "TURN LEFT/RIGHT 4 -0 DEGREES IMMEDIATELY"


8th Feb 2007, 09:26
Thanks Flightwatch. Seems like I dont need to check into the funny farm yet.:ok: Perhaps Boris worked for Tarom.:}

8th Feb 2007, 10:17
Ah yes, Flightwatch, you must have been flying for BEA at the time that they were trying to make all their aircraft "Super", when they were not that super really.
There was certainly a reduced "coffin corner" problem with the improved wing leading edge fitted to later 500s and, I believe, 475s.
Doubtless you will correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall BEA aircraft had the front airstairs replaced with a weight to appease the step-pushers union of BEA. As built, they were also short of water injection and the drooped leading edge. Not so Super really although the flight-deck cupholders were moved slightly from standard in the BA build specification! What profligate money wasters there must have been in certain areas but they managed to get away with no drop-downs!
I understand that, at a similar time, Boeing refused to allow BEA to brand their original 737s the "Super 737" as it would have implied something that it wasn't and thus pee of other customers!

8th Feb 2007, 20:18
In the late 70's, a BA 1-11 driver told me that the front airstairs were taken away to save weight. They then had CofG problems, so the airstairs were replaced with concrete blocks:rolleyes:

8th Feb 2007, 21:17
All sorts of stories about the One Eleven how about this one, if the starter whouln,t engauge the engineer would go to the engine open the cowling and hit it with a rawhide hammer and that did the trick on many occasions.

Turn back the clock and have a bit of noise it will keep people awake and they would know what is going on

8th Feb 2007, 22:12
You would do it to your car :)

1-11 was a great machine, when not hot and heavy as I remember as a groundie, had a weakness for sheared CSDSs as I remember.

It's designers, did, if I am not wrong, share information regarding 'deep stall'

9th Feb 2007, 05:40
The one that was converted was done, allegedly, on the whim of a senior British Officer on secondment as Commander Armed Forces. He didn't like tech stops en route to UK. The resulting a/c was great for him but did not have enough hold space remaining, for the luggage of the 80 or so passengers who could still fly on it when it was on non-VIP duties. All right for some!

9th Feb 2007, 12:09
All sorts of stories about the One Eleven how about this one, if the starter whouln,t engauge the engineer would go to the engine open the cowling and hit it with a rawhide hammer and that did the trick on many occasions.

Winessed that on more than one occaision at LGW, a/c pushed back off stand, 1 eng wouldn't start so a/c called engineering who sent a chap out, eng opened fwd hold and pulled out the set of steps kept in there, then proceeded to open the cowls of the offending engine and give it a "technical tap";)

9th Feb 2007, 14:30
From Memory:
1-11 200 Series
(equivalent to the DC 9-10 Series - The one with no rear stairs and detachable tail-cone for emergency exit)
Very Reliable - TDR of what one expects today.

BUA/BCAL Standard Configuration of 79Y Seats.
Although over the years various F/Y and other Configurations.
Usual Airstairs at rear, but BUA/BCAL Used Towable steps at the front.
The 1-11 Series I have the greatest affection for.

1-11 400 Series - Lakers ones, again very good TDR
84 Seats Charter Configuration.

1-11 500 Series - BCAL - TDR a problem - CSD Shearing (thanks for reminding of that me BoredCounter) and Air Systems being the ever present concerns

The Air System problem was often the Links between Ducting becoming detached and always it appeared at the places where access was to say the least difficult , so Engineers would need to work in positions that the human body was not designed to adopt.
BCAL Configurations - Many over the years but:
Schedules - 8F 80Y (With variants for Tripoli), 104Y, 99Y (latterly with movebale Curtain to creat a C Class area :-)

Charter - 114Y
After Courtline introduced the 119Y Charter Configuration with Seat Back 'Catering'. BCAL Tried it, but it didn't last (Thank God).

As Jetties became more common the 1-11 Series caused problems because the Front Airstair compartment (even if not fitted) was concealed by the Main Passenger Door, so if a if a jetty used it had to dock well below the Passenger cabin floor level resulting in a dangerously high step down. There was as far as I am aware never an elegant solution to this problem. With at LGW A Wooden Step and several attempts at Hook-on Ramps.

Those were the days - Good and Bad.

9th Feb 2007, 21:57
Laker's first four a/c were 320L's
They had a -400 (G-AXMU) on a temp lease after I think G-AVYZ suffered a fire?

BUA's 1-11 seats were rearward facing for trooping flights.

9th Feb 2007, 22:00
Laker's first four a/c were 320L's
They had a -400 (G-AXMU) on a temp lease after I think G-AVYZ suffered a fire?


BUA's 1-11 seats were rearward facing for trooping flights.

10th Feb 2007, 05:38
Tenneco US had two c/n 083 N502T & 183 N503T built as corporate.

Dan Air 87
10th Feb 2007, 13:13
I loved the BAC1-11 and flew on them all over Europe and the UK with BA and good ole Dan Air. They were a superb m/c and I agree with an earlier post that they were machined out of a block of steel. OK, it was a bit tight if it was qa full Monday morning business flight buty you knew where you were. Plus they could get into any UK airport where there were cross winds (that the Boeing 737/757 were unable to handle).

Beautilful aircraft handled by great crews!

10th Feb 2007, 19:46
Re: drop down oxygen.....weren't the masks behind a flap in the backs of the seats? Or was that a later version of the -500's? I do have a soft spot for them as it was my first aircraft type I flew commercially. The horredously complicated "first checks " and the convaluted APU and engine starting technique. I couldn't believe that Boeing just had a single APU ON/OFF switch.It did marvellous single channel CAT3 Autolands (for its time) "Prime Land , Land and Glide, Flags Clear" ring a bell anybody?

10th Feb 2007, 20:56
Engineers opened the cowlings to hit the CSDS PRV and it normally wasn't with a hide faced hammer, a chock did just as well. The 1-11 was a pain to work on, no sentiment about this aeroplane at all apart from the fact that it paid the mortgage.
G-ATPL....oh no the memories are coming back!


11th Feb 2007, 18:17
I thought this would have been a much more interesting thread. I was a Captain for nearly 3 years on the 500's. I have some wonderful memories like freighting 80 gallon barrels of demin water to places like Linate then finding the electric pump didnt work so had to hand pump the water in the tank. The pax wouldnt have believed it! As for Boris - did you work for the CAA or some other government agency or maybe even Boeing!? You obviously didnt like the 'BUS Stop' jet and even less what BEA/BOAC required of their aircraft to the detriment of the UK aviation industry. Well neither did I. Take away the forward steps and replace with concrete block. Remove water injection system. 'Apparently' BOAC were so fussy about how they wanted their Britannia 312's that by the time they were satisfied by them - the mighty 707 had been rolled out! BCal did not do such things. If the Yanks had designed the 1-11 it would have been a world beater at the time. Oh and for any other ex 1-11 pilots - anyone remember 2DIX. Answers on a postcard.:} :ok:

15th Feb 2007, 13:31
I have some wonderful memories like freighting 80 gallon barrels of demin water to places like Linate then finding the electric pump didnt work so had to hand pump the water in the tank.

You're fortunate you didn't have to load 30+ barrels onto the A300 every few weeks so that places like Mahon had a good supply ready and waiting for them:)

pax britanica
16th Feb 2007, 06:54
Interesting to read about the 1-11 starter problems.

I went LGW-Athens on a Laker 1-11 in about 1977 and on the return the left engine starter failled witha hideous grinding noise

Droll captain said 'I do not think I have to tell you folks that somethings just gone wrong' Stuck overnight in the famous Athens Airport area hotel right next to the threshold.

On the return, ATH-LGW seemed a longway for a 1-11 we were quite high-I remember the captain saying we had to climb above some weather to FL390??. The 1-11 may have managed it but the cabin condition really struggled as we got very hot and very poor air quality. Most of the Pax were a SAGA holdiay group (for which I now qualify ) and the cabin crew were kept very busy with the portable oxygen for much of the journey

16th Feb 2007, 07:36
'Apparently' BOAC were so fussy about how they wanted their Britannia 312's that by the time they were satisfied by them - the mighty 707 had been rolled out! BCal did not do such things.

Going off-topic a bit but I always thought the Britannia was so late into service because the Bristol Proteus engine suffered from severe icing (multiple flame-outs in the tropics, etc) that took a long time to trace and cure. Eventual cure was very simple but finding the problem in the first place wasn't.

Midland 331
16th Feb 2007, 08:13
>On the return, ATH-LGW seemed a longway for a 1-11 we were quite high-I remember the captain saying we had to climb above some weather to FL390??.

I once heard a 1-11 200 seres (? I think! One of Dan Air's G-ATPL/PK) report level at FL370 on an INV-LHR run. Were they happy at this height? Was there a "coffin corner" lurking?


16th Feb 2007, 12:07
G-ATPL/PK were ex British Eagle 111 series 300s.

18th Feb 2007, 10:45
Pax Britannica
Spent many a time on Laker 1-11 jumpseats and we sure never got
above 350.
Father had flown VC.10's before going to Laker and we used to see them pass us on a weekend going down to Tenerife and much to his irritation, on the way back. They were usually at 410.

18th Feb 2007, 18:27
The DA 1-11 I went on in 1988, I am sure had a step halfway up the isle?

I am certain it was a 1-11 with 1 small step near the rows of seats by the wing?

It is a long time ago to remember exact details.


22nd Feb 2007, 11:40
I remember one of the BA drivers telling me he was taking his retirement (as were quite a few other people at BA) when the 1-11 fleet at Manchester was being wound down.

I'd been sent out to collect him from home and we had a good old chat on the way up to the airport (the BA one-eleven drivers were a friendly old bunch!). He genuinely loved that plane, and mentioned that corrosion and fatigue were practically unknown on the G-AVM* frames right up until the last day.

It's an old chestnut in aviation as it's been suggested for many types, but apparently there was some genuine agitation at the time for a serious punt at re-engining the 1-11 due to the longevity of the aircraft. Weight considerations and the rest must have been against it, as well as the balancing problems new motors would cause.

22nd Feb 2007, 13:07
apparently there was some genuine agitation at the time for a serious punt at re-engining the 1-11 due to the longevity of the aircraft
Yes indeed. The Dee Howard company in the US were to the fore on this project, using Rolls Royce Tays (as used on the Fokker F100).

No support from BAe who could see their hoped-for sales of the BAe146 being cannibalised by such a relife project, likewise Rolls would rather have just supplied Tays to Fokker. In truth it's a lot of money to spend on a 20-year old aircraft that will still be a 20-year old aircraft when you finish.

23rd Feb 2007, 10:25
IIRC there was a proposed refanning with Tays which would have made the 1-11 into a low acquisition cost aircraft to be exported to airlines in developing countries.

Robert Maxwell (!) had the same idea many years ago in a proposed project with Armand Hammer, which would have seen surplus Tu-104 aircraft bought from the Soviet Union and fitted with the JT8D. He obviously couldn't fit it in to his pension robbing schedule.

Both aircraft shared the basic factor of being built like a tank, and it could have worked if there was serious industrial muscle (like BAe) behind it. It's like the 707 programs to refan them, without Boeing on board then they never really seemed to go anywhere. The 1-11 would have been a cheap and rugged frame to bolt Tays to, not needing excessive amounts of fancy rewiring to do regional services in the third world.

ROMBAC (?) was also looking at Tays for their Romanian built frames, or even new builds. I think that may have been the project that could have borne fruit as their frames were the youngest after all.

23rd Feb 2007, 12:02
Unfortunately the third-world countries are the very ones where the noise issues of the Spey are the last thing on their agendas and everyone is focused on cost. After 20 years a re-engine would cost a lot more than buying the aircraft in the first place. So its all down to whether the Tay would save you enough money to balance its purchase cost. And for the limited airframe life remaining it probably wouldn't.

FedEx and UPS re-engined their 727s with in the USA because they were forced to in order to meet nighttime noise requirements. A different matter.

There also isn't that much market in third world countries for short haul jets, just look at their current fleets. What most of them desire first is long range aircraft to connect them into Europe and the USA at near-Western fare levels.

23rd Feb 2007, 15:56
The point was that serious thought was being given to the projects as the 1-11 was a durable enough airframe to be considered for the job.

When the secondhand price of the jet was so low, it made it look possible to fit the Tay and offer it at a fraction of the cost of something comparable. Fuel consumption is also supposedly lower for the Tay than an equivalent Spey. The reality is, as you observe, that it never went anywhere as those airlines want something better and the overall numbers would not make sense to them. There was something similar proposed for classic diesel 9s too.

That Maxwell project was something else again as it related to earlier times when aviation in the third world was still seat-of-the-pants stuff, and the Tu-104 with its Soviet style layout may have been attractive to carriers at less than ideal airports with basic runways.

Anyway God bless the 1-11. It made me a nice few quid over the years.

24th Feb 2007, 09:35
The Rolls Royce Heritage Trust publication by Ken Goddard tells the whole
sorry tale of the Tay BAC 111.
Not BAE's finest hour.

Plank Cap
24th Feb 2007, 11:57
http://tkfiles.storage.msn.com/x1pRQztkSSMjWMfB8SweHkbL4mi7kc6ywV6eaop5tL59XvndvEIOqFccg9FA blXAqCN29qs0Gv0ua-7Ukq47Ng4Tt--clp1AeXAkqV27Nc4Cuo

Seen last month in Lagos, gathering dust.... very sad.

24th Feb 2007, 14:09
From the merely sad to the tragic

Okada 1-11s languishing at their Maintenance Base in Benin City Nigeria April 2005 (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0815697/M/)

Off Topic - Is that forlorn Airbus still sitting by the Runway at Lagos?

25th Feb 2007, 01:41
I recall the Nigerians sticking a blanket ban on the 1-11 flying in their airspace, so even if those parked aircraft were just dirty there was no way they could be moved anywhere.

Which is something of a shame, if any of the preservation people were looking for one in decent nick that was still moveable.

25th Feb 2007, 06:11
I'm sure that Chief (His Highness The #1 Shafter) Obignian will gladly accept a few pennies for that lot with the local ethnic camo for free. You'll first have to pay all the owed enroute/terminal nav/landing fees though. Don't forget what
happened to his son some years back with federal funds.

26th Feb 2007, 16:24
I hope that DARPA or whatever it is that is still buzzing about finds its way into preservation eventually. The one which looks somewhat peculiar with its bolted on bits of Typhoon.

Isn't there another one in extremely good nick with the Empire Test Pilots School? ZE432 it says on their page as it's on the RAF books.

This is extremely unnerving as I really never considered I'd ever feel nostalgic about a bloody one-eleven! :}

13th Mar 2007, 07:05
"G-WLAD in Manx Airlines livery." Rememeber fitting the No. 1 engine Ground runs and signing it out from LHR. Also many hours fixing BA Fleet at LHR, BHX, MAN, CDG, plus many on contract, so many engine changes and ground runs. Last one's I rememeber working on was G-AZUK, doing a VIP conversion for a Nigerian Chief.

13th Mar 2007, 11:43

It took a while, but I finally remembered where I'd seen a pic of the ETPS 1-11 ...... http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/51090

tubby linton
13th Mar 2007, 14:19
Does anybody know what happened to the two Air Malawi aircraft?

cvt person
13th Mar 2007, 21:54
The two air Malawi 1/11s!
c/n 214 began life as G-AXJM with British United, then 7Q-YKI with Air Malawi, then back to G-AXJM with British Caledonian transferred to British Airways on the Caledonian/BA merger, then 5N-OAL with Oriental airlines withdrawn from use at Lagos in 1996.
c/n 235 began life as G-AYSC with Court Line, then D-AMAT with Germanair, then Bavaria then Hapag Lloyd, then 7Q-YKK with Air Malawi, then 5N-USE with Okada Air withdrawn from use BeninCity 1997.
c/n 243 delivered as 7Q-YKF to Air Malawi then to 5N-SKS with GAS Air Nigeria withdrawn in 1993
c/n 245 started as DQ-FBQ of Air Pacific, then 7Q-YKQ with Air Malawi, back to DQ-FBQ with Air Pacific then ZE433 with the Royal Aircraft Establishment.
c/n 039 G-ATTP British Eagle, 9J-RCH Zambian Airways, 7Q-YKE Air Malawi, 9J-RCH Zambian Airways, G-ATTP Dan Air, CC-CYM LADECO withdrawn 1994
Think thats all of them

13th Mar 2007, 22:14
The One Eleven what an aeroplane many years ago it was the first aeroplane I flew on, a day trip to Gatwick from Jersey on a new years day what a day to do it on well it was a free be or someone else payed, never flown before and never looked back since.

Still involved in aviation and hopefully for a number of years to come.

Sad though that some of our British built aircraft are not operating in the skies where they belong?

Maybe No 10 should have one of the BAC 111s for No 10 local run around a nice little VC10 for long haul with the odd trip in a Concorde for a quick chat with him over the ocean at Bush house.

Not a bad idea to keep some of our great aircraft in the air shame some are grounded at the moment.

Tone I know a friend or two that might be able to help out but we need the Airframes to do it with.

I look forward to No 10s reply

British Aerospace could be back on the shopping list at number 10?

Well we can live in hope or no hope.

13th Mar 2007, 23:10
As cabin crew I operated 500's, 400's and 539's, we got the latter, well 3 of em, in BHX when they were new! Also remember a summer with an arabic 400 I think it was reg BUA40, known of course a bugger up! On night flights, remember night Malta's on a 1-11 folks?, we used to turn the galley lights off, listen for the rustle and see how many cockroaches we could kill. Poor engineers could never get rid of them, no matter what fumigation they did.

If memory serves they went back to the Gulf with the aircraft.

A right mare of an aircraft from a cabin crew point of view, but we always felt safe in them. I seem to recall a tale on another thread about Captain 'fingers' Benton who bounced one over a crossing aircraft, think it was either DUS or FRAs coming into land. Tough as Desperate Dan they were!

Happy Days!

tubby linton
13th Mar 2007, 23:17
cvt person which one was the 475 version?I flew on both as a passenger back in the early 1980s.Malawi was high plus hot so always a bit of a challenge for the old girl.

tubby linton
13th Mar 2007, 23:24
The 1-11 had a number after the series number plus in some cases a two letter code.Does anybody have a decode for these?

14th Mar 2007, 04:57
There's a Production List page on this site http://www.bac1-11jet.co.uk/

You are correct that all 1-11s had both a 3 digit Type number and a two letter type code that was on all wiring diagrams (plus slash numbers if there was more than one mod level for the type or latterly a letter code if it had been mod'd for another operator e.g EK/D for the Robin Loh conversion from Channel.

The list gives Air Malawi as taking delivery of one Type 481FW (243 7Q-YKF). I remember working on an "Engine Contingency Rating" system for Hot & High ops that allowed the crew to exceed normal ITT up to (if memory serves - it's a long time ago) 5 times per engine before a full inspection.

14th Mar 2007, 07:21
I did ask at the outset of this thread 'Does anyone know just how many are flying' and where they are?

cvt person
14th Mar 2007, 21:28
Tubby Linton
There were two 1/11 475's with Air Malawi
C/n 245 7Q-YKQ on strength from July 74 to November 75 and
c/n 243 7Q-YKF on strength from 1972 to 1993

18th Mar 2007, 19:05
YKF was Air Malawi's own aircraft and delivered to them new, while YKQ the leased Air Pacific model. Both were 475s.
Their most interesting sector was Blantyre-Seychelles with a point of no return and island reserve and their most interesting arrival into Seychelles was in bad weather on the 3rd attempt achieved by a low level cloud break out to sea and very long and flat run in.
Air Malawi's crews , noted for their humour as well as operational expertise, were excellent and operated the 1-11, HS 748, and the Standard VC 10 with very high standards of punctuality. A speciality of the VC 10 , which carried a Navigator , was to bypass the scheduled Nairobi fuel stop southbound if possible and operate Gatwick-Blantyre direct.

19th Mar 2007, 04:19
"I did ask at the outset of this thread 'Does anyone know just how many are flying' and where they are?"

That would appear to be a difficult question to answer as several US aircraft are technically on the register (Mainly ex-AAL bizjet conversions) but in reality no longer flying. There's a Yahoo BAC 1-11 group you can join & I beleive they have an annual list with a speculative number but...

The active operators I'm aware of are Northrop-Grumman (flying test beds),
Boscombe Down (QnetiQ/EPTS), TAROM or its successors, Royal Omani AF (slated for replacement next year with A320s) and that's about it - maybe a dozen. Don't know what happened to the one & only Dee Howard Tay-engined prototype.

bacardi walla
19th Mar 2007, 06:33
5 pages and no mention of the Mediterranean Express 475's. I worked for them back in 1987 and had many a hairy shuttle round the Channel Islands on subs for Air UK. Now, where are my photos........:uhoh:

19th Mar 2007, 07:11
Thanks ICT. Were these the same Med Express that BA did up for you ex South American, if they are we even kitted them out with seats for nothing

19th Mar 2007, 14:08

look at post number 2 and look at that website.. Will tell You want You want to know..


20th Mar 2007, 04:07
So if they were ex-South American that would make them ex-Faucett Type FDs if memory serves. Funnily enough one of the few operators of the CRJ (the 1-11's grandchild) south of the equator is Southern Wings over the same routes.

20th Mar 2007, 04:30
UN-B1110, a -400 is still active at Almaty, and recently one (possibly two) 500s have been flying for SCAT (Ah, the sound of those Speys!), seen this month at both Almaty and Astana. Must try to identify them properly if I can get close enough.

bacardi walla
20th Mar 2007, 04:40
Found one picture at least......... G-AZUK

20th Mar 2007, 12:13
I run the BAC 1-11 website and can confirm to all of you that want any further information to check out www.bac1-11jet.co.uk
The details on this site are more than purely "speculative" as are those on the BAC 1-11 Forum at Yahoo Groups that I also run.
I can confirm that there are approximately 20 or so 1-11s still flying.
These are as follows:-
Air Katanga - 9Q-CSJ - Lubumbashi DRC (possibly grounded by now)
Business Jet Access - N999BW - Dallas Love Field
Vigo Jet - XB-JZX - Puerto Vallarta
Grupo Adelac - XA-CMG - Toluca
GST Aero / East Wing - UN-B1110 - Almaty
ITAB - 9Q-CDY - Lubumbashi DRC (Used by compagnie africaine d'aviation)
Libavia - 5A-DKO - Tripoli Mitiga
JetEx Flight Support / MIA Airlines - YR-CJL, HRS, MIA - Bucharest Baneasa
Northrop Grumman - N161NG, 162W, 164W - Baltimore Washington
QinetiQ - ZE432, ZE433, ZH763 - Boscombe Down
Romavia - YR-BRE - Bucharest Otopeni (Government aircraft)
Royal Air Force Of Oman - 551, 552, 553 - Muscat Seeb
Select Leasing Inc - N111JX, N200EE - Waukesha Crites Field
Trast Aero / Aquiline Intl - EX-086, EX-103 - Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan
Total 24 airframes although several of these have not been reported in service for quite some time.
I hope this helps.
Please check the 1-11 website for any further updates or join the forum!

27th Mar 2007, 07:48
Noted a 1-11 parked on the business ramp at Malaga last night.

Too dark to see any other details.

29th Mar 2007, 04:11
If I remember correctly the last airframes built by Romaero were just abandoned on the line. Does anyone know what became of them & who, if any, now owns the design rights?

30th Mar 2007, 01:25
If so, you can purchase one here...


30th Mar 2007, 05:17
Well, I still do not know how many are in the SCAT fleet here in Kazakhstan, but just watched a 1-11-500 depart Almaty to Dushanbe. Their schedule shows quite a few 1-11 flights :


31st Mar 2007, 10:01
I am interested in the complicated APU start sequence. Can anybody advise?

31st Mar 2007, 10:44
For something that was once almost a reflex action I am racking my cell to thinking of anything complicated.
Battery - on (no separate Battery)
Fire test
APU Master switch on
Press Start
Monitor EGT (was there a LOP light?)
Electrics available at 95%

Bleed available when stable

Might have missed something which I'm sure will be pointed out - it has been 20 years !

31st Mar 2007, 12:28
Agree with WODRICK, starting was straightforward.
Maybe SOPS is referring to the change over from APU bleed air to engine bleed air after take off when a correct sequence of valve opening and closing was required.
I seem to remember there was a story about a British Eagle One Eleven that stuffed up the sequence and left the APU bleed on mixing with the engine bleed. After about an hour they had a serious duct over heat problem.

31st Mar 2007, 13:18
Thanks guys..was just refering to an earlier post that said the APU was complicated to start!

29th Sep 2019, 21:07
Interesting old thread. I flew on one of the Rombac 1-11s in 1987. It was YU-ANS, on a damp lease (along with several sister ships) to Adria Airways from Tarom. I went to Ljubljana and back from Leeds Bradford. The aeroplane itself was only three years old at the time and was pleasant and comfortable, just a little dated inside. Outside, the only changes were substituting the Tarom logo and titles for those of Adria, plus giving the aircraft a Yugoslav registration. It was a hot day in Leeds for the outbound flight and it seemed to take forever to become airborne off RW32.

30th Sep 2019, 11:40
I had a similar experience coming out of Palermo in a British Island 400 series late on the evening of 18th October 1988 after visiting the Targa Florio. When the lady pilot came through the cabin later, I asked her about the lengthy take-off run and she replied "You noticed did you,so did we" and moved on. Happy Days

Cornish Jack
1st Oct 2019, 09:38
When I joined BA at Cranebank (late 80s) they still had the 1-11 sim installed. I had a couple of 'fun' sessions on it and the most noticeable effect was the very strong increase in aileron forces with increasing speed. For anyone who flew the real machine, was that similar?