Why Are The Tucanos Knackered?

[seafuryfan]

I'm only looking at this from a

'bloke-who-remembers-the-Tucano-coming-into-service' perspective, but are they knackered already?

I mean, they still look nice and shiny, and people seem to like flying them. Wasn't the JP in service for much longer? Or am I getting old? Correction, I AM getting old.

What's the story?

[moggiee]

They're lightweight designs which have been badly adapted and badly built.

My father in law used to work in structures at Linton - repairing cracked wing spars, rudders and elevators at under 400 flying hours!

[TOPBUNKER]

It's coz the politicians insisted on buying the wrong aircraft (South American interests) which subsequently had to be modified, making it heavier than the original machine.

Perhaps the RAF should have bought the PC-9 in the first place (as recommended by CFS)?

[moggiee]

The best aeroplane to replace the JP would have been a new JP. A JP6 with a modern engine, avionics etc would have done nicely.

After all, look at what's replaced each generation of Hawk - new Hawks!

[Tiger_mate]

After all, look at what's replaced each generation of Hawk - new Hawks!

Which will almost certainly continue for as long as a human being needs to be in the cockpit. The Hawk fuselage optimises the training aircraft, and in Sydney Camms words "Looks right". Everything else including wings, engines and avionics can be updated, but the basic shape is timeless. Though to contradict myself a little, the long snout on the 128 version looks like a bodge, and probably could have been manafactured a little cleaner.

[moggiee]

Indeed - if the basic design is right there's no need to chuck it away each time.

I don't recall there being a huge amount wrong with the fundamental deign of the JP. The bolt on bits are an easy upgrade and surely cheaper in the long run than taking a punt on an unknown quantity.

[Molesworth Hold]

Ten Tucano airframes have been through the "Spares Recovery" process and the remains carted away on low loaders. Still plenty more sitting in the hangars.
Is there any truth in the rumour that one airframe is a bit longer than all the rest?

[greycoat]

Topbunker, was there not some rumour circulating that the Brazilian ac was (politically) favoured due to a Vulcan diverting during FI conflict?

[Squirrel 41]

Interesting - I had heard that the clincher had been that the Tucano would be built by Shorts in Belfast rather than the PC-9(UK) being built somewhere else, and it was considered politically important to pump money into NI at the time.

Aussies don't seem to want to bin thier PC-9s bought at about the same time!

S41

[Dick Whittingham]

The RAF got the Tucano because Hezza had a rush of blood to the head. The two contenders in the final RAF evaluation were the PC9 and the Tucano, and before the evaluation was complete Hezza woke up from one of his long spells of inactivity and just chose the Tucano out of the blue

At that time the stated MOD policy was to buy a trainer off the shelf that required no further development. The PC9 met this criteria, the Tucano did not, having to go through a long post-contract development.

The real reason IMHO, for the Tucano buy was to put money into NI through Shorts, plus a feeling that BAe had too much of the cake already.

So a Minister with his hair standing on end and his eyes revolving pre-empted the evaluation his own Ministry had asked for and bought an aircraft that did not met his own Ministry's published criteria. Nothing new there, then.

Dick W

[BluntM8]

Is there any truth in the rumour that one airframe is a bit longer than all the rest?

Yes, in a word. The airframes were built by hand, and in most cases they vary slightly. I recal that the difference in length across the fleet is in the order of 6 inches. In fact, the panels for each aircraft are more-or-less completely unique to that airframe. You can't pull an access panel off one and fit it to another, they're all different sizes!

As a student pilot, I recall that certain aircraft flew noticably better than others. ZF243 was a partictular favourite of mine, it seemed very easy to fly accurately. Others had their own foibles, such as refusing to trim or being less stable than others.

Why is the Tucano fleet knackered? I can't speak for them all, but if you were to find the aircraft I learned Glide Circuits in, then I'll take responsibility for that one! :\

Blunty

[MostlyHarmless]

Is there any truth in the rumour that one airframe is a bit longer than all the rest?
Heard a number of tales about this - lining up all the spinners on the line for a VIP visit and the tails were all over the shop.
Personal favorite is the one that they couldn't get to fly straight so sent to Boscombe to play with. Apparently it had an extra rib in one wing.
Sounds a bit far fetched to me, but don't let that get in the way of a good story :)

[BluntM8]

The most apparent way to see the difference is lookng at the aerial on the spine behind the canopy - UHF if I remember correctly (no doubt some A2 will be along to correct me soon? :}) - the different positions are quite apparent.

[moggiee]

Heard a number of tales about this - lining up all the spinners on the line for a VIP visit and the tails were all over the shop.

Personal favorite is the one that they couldn't get to fly straight so sent to Boscombe to play with. Apparently it had an extra rib in one wing.
Sounds a bit far fetched to me, but don't let that get in the way of a good story :)

My father in law was working on one that just would not fly right - despite numerous re-rigging sessions on the flight control surfaces.

A quick check with the tape measure revealed one wing about 1" longer than the other. I have no reason to doubt him as this was first hand experience.

No two airframes are the same - as said above, access panels from one won't fit another and repair parts made in accordance with the tech drawings NEVER fitted without major modification.

[Al R]

Isn't having a bespoke aircraft far nicer than having a horrid production line special anyway? I seem to recall Vulcans were erm, coachbuilt. Just like a Veyron. :)

(Incidentally, I was so impressed with Stiff Needle's test drive of one on 5th Gear last night, I'm that little bit closer to ordering mine now).

[moggiee]

(Incidentally, I was so impressed with Stiff Needle's test drive of one on 5th Gear last night, I'm that little bit closer to ordering mine now).
Which - Vulcan or Veyron?

[Al R]

Did he try the Vulcan too then? :eek:

[PPRuNeUser0211]

If you're one of the favoured few who have the pedals wound all the way to the stops, the "coach built" effect is particularly noticeable! The difference between comfort and annoyance is certainly there within the fleet...

[pontifex]

Dick W is absolutely right. The PC9 was at least head and shoulders above the Tucano in every department (and don't even mention the Firecracker which was supposed to be in the final fly off. It was but didn't complete the required 25 hours testing before being binned). One example - the spec called for the ability to carry out linked aeros at FL150. Tucano couldn't but had to throttle back to avoid gaining height in the PC9. PC9 could outmaneuver a Mk5 JP and had caught it up by the end of the Boscombe runway on a 5 sec stream take off. All it could not do was outrun the JP in a dive. I was very sad when the political decision was made to buy the Tucano. Having said that I can quite understand that political and diplomatic considerations must be taken into account in the overall national interest when multi million pound projects are involved.

[Union Jack]

Could there be a (very) tenuous link with the old joke about Scunthorpe?:)

Jack

[RETDPI]

Well ,Typhoo put the "t" in Britain.

[Farfrompuken]

Why Are The Tucanos Knackered
Possibly because I, amongst many, have spent 800 odd hrs butchering the Yorkshire skies in them;)
I understand we shipped out a whole shed-load of Landrovers to Switzerland to keep them sweet after we dumped the PC9

[Guzlin Adnams]

Apart from the JP what would be the best aircraft to replace them with, 311, PC21 or maybe Harvard 11 or even the "super" Tucano?
I suppose it will come down to what deal the prime contractor can get from what manufacturer and/or what's politically expedient:rolleyes:.
Still be interested what the CFS would deem the most appropriate though.

[chevvron]

Should've bought the Firecracker instead and supported the UK aircraft industry.

[pontifex]

Chevvron - I assume you are joking!

[Firestreak]

What makes you think the Tucano is knackered? Basically, it isn't. All the frames have been through the Fatigue Mod programme and are good for years to come. The only reason some are being binned at Shawbury is simply that the RAF doesn't need them anymore--the air force is much smaller than when the Tucano was ordered. In addition 4 are going/have gone to the States and I believe one is being put on the UK register.

How long the thing stays in service is totally dependant on MFTS, the contractor may opt to run the Tucano on for a few years whilst any new basic tainer is brought into service. Overall, the Tucano does a decent job, it's detractors are usually folk who don't know it too well. Yes, they are individual and some fly better than others but it does it's job.

[seafuryfan]

Thanks for your replies everyone - very interesting reading...

Firestreak - I thought the Tucano was knackered because I had heard in recent years similar stories to those posted above, have read articles in the aviation press about a replacement, and have seen them being placed into storage.

I suppose the thread title was a bit cheeky - but it seems to have stimulated interest and I'm glad that those like yourself have posted to tell your side of the story.

How successful has it been? Well, as someone who mills around with ex-Tucano drivers I don't hear ill spoken of it as a trainer, but the tales of ill-fitting canopies and non-interchangeable parts etc do persist.

[Razor61]

Farnborough gave a little hint at what the MoD will be replacing them with.
Either the Aeromacchi 311 or the Texan II. However more types might join the contest.
Knowing our Government we will opt for something different and cock it up again

[John Farley]

I would have thought that the real assessment of any trainer after a period in service should start with asking whether the graduating pupils have reached the necessary high standard for the next stage of their development. If pupils have had to learn to deal with many various minor aircraft deficiencies (minor as in non flight safety related) then one can argue that this has contributed to their training experience.

If the pilots are to the required standard then by all means let us talk about costs, politics or whether people feel it looks sexy (good for morale).

I have never flown a Tucano - after my time.

So chaps (QFIs and bloggs) does it do the piloting job or not?

JF

[Farfrompuken]

So chaps (QFIs and bloggs) does it do the piloting job or not?


well, It does seem that the wash-out or chop rate at AFT/ATTU is fairly low at the moment. Can't speak for the FJ OCUs tho'.

IMHO Tincan is a great platform to improve one's real piloting skills. It can be flown by anyone, but to do it on the numbers takes work/skill.

You're lacking speed and it's like the ride in a steamroller at low-level, but the basics get taught well.

However, many modern a/c are 'carefree' handling FBW with MFDs etc etc, so I guess the RAF needs to look at a/c that are internally configured that way, rather than the old analogue presentation.

But the bottom line is that it's doing its job of BASIC Flying Training well.

[devonianflyer]

Dunno about any other bloggs, but I had a great time flying the tincan! I'm told it moved my abilities along for the better! Shame it was cut short, but never mind! My new aircraft has got a lot more room in it thankfully, and I'm told the next one will have an oven!

[Swept]

The other reason is when they came into service we were allowed to pull the wings off them as we assumed they would be as reliable as the Hawk. 5g max rate descending turns, can't even do that in my GR4!
2 years later and G was limited as they realised fatigue was going through the roof but alas too late. Good fun for inverted spinning and messing around in those days, 1997ish!

[PumpCockMixMags]

The best aeroplane to replace the JP would have been a new JP. A JP6 with a modern engine, avionics etc would have done nicely.

After all, look at what's replaced each generation of Hawk - new Hawks!


The new hawk was forced on the military and was not the 1st choice, the Aermacchi 346 outshone the 128 in all aspects, flew 1st and was significantly cheaper but thanks to some lobbying by FAT MAN Prescott (MP for Brough) (BAe builds the hawk 128 at Brough):suspect: and a certain Indian contract, we get an overpriced british alternative.

The Tin can is a robust machine that takes plenty of abuse from the studes and staff alike and keeps on going. It was designed to train pilots who were to fly 70s aircraft and is now starting to fall short of the Linton mission statement "to train the pilots and WISOs of tomorrows airforce". The US, Canadians, Irish, Saudis etc have glass cockpit PC 9s of one guise or another and we are looking down the same route. Tucano has plenty of flying hours left in the airframe but falls short in other areas of training.

I certainly enjoyed flying the Tincan but bring on the 311 please....:cool:

PS we now pull 5.5g regularly-No g pants:hmm:

[Fake Sealion]

Mention made in this thread of the Firecracker. Hope my memory is behaving but I recall the CFS boys at Leeming in 1978/9 borrowing one for evalution of some kind. It was painted in camouflage I recall.
We were flying our Bulldogs with RNEFTS one day at Topcliffe and it pitches up mid afternoon. The CFI then appointed a chosen stude to fly in the back seat (suppose it was front seat??) for return to Leeming instead of the pussers bus !!! Thought is was a handsome aeroplane, but didn't realise what became of it until now. Was it piston rather than turbine?

Think the Firecracker was flown by Bob Cole???

Ahh Back in t'day.

FS

[Dan Winterland]

The JP was past it. Great if you still had Lightnings and Hunters as front line aircraft, but it was time to move on. I thought the Tuc was far superior in nearly all aspects. It was great when I instructed on it, and speaking to the current bods, things haven't changed much.

And BTW, the Irish glass cockpit PC9s aren't the trainers, they're the front line fighters!

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!]

Apparently it had an extra rib in one wing. was that one called Adam?

[Double Zero]

In what way is the Aermachi superior to the Hawk then ?

There's also the rather obvious benefit of commonality with the old fleet, and it's money for UK Ltd...

The 100 series has a dodgy looking nose because it has some rather useful kit, inc a laser rangefinder and FLIR - it was severely tested on G-Hawk and the shape doesn't cause any deficiencies - though if you want something a little more sexy try the Hawk 200.

I'm surprised to read about the 'hand crafted, every panel unique' nature of the Tucano - in the mid 1980's BAe were told EXTREMELY strictly that for the Harrier GR5 from then on all panels must be inter-changeable, no excuses.

There was a nasty accident early on when the Chief Test Pilot of the Tucano was killed - I thought there were rumours of unpleasant behaviour at handling extremes, and / or poor escape facilities.

As I say, rumours...forget the outcome of the BOI, though from experience that's not a thing to go by.

The Firecracker was deemed a lemon by a TP who knows what he's talking about !

[WillDAQ]

>The new hawk was forced on the military and was not the 1st choice, the >Aermacchi 346 outshone the 128 in all aspects, flew 1st and was >significantly cheaper but thanks to some lobbying by FAT MAN Prescott (MP >for Brough) (BAe builds the hawk 128 at Brough):suspect: and a certain Indian >contract, we get an overpriced british alternative.

I was under the impression that it was BAES claiming that they would have to close the Hawk design office that was applying the pressure, rather than Prescott being involved.

The competition was nothing short of open warfare between the MoD and treasury which at one point included the treasury claiming that the Hawk cost £1.8bn more than the 346, much greater than the total procurement cost for the Hawk option.

Not sure about being 'forced' on the military, but the DPA/DESO seemed to be happy enough with the Hawk to go to war with the treasury over it.

[Elmlea]

In what way is the Aermachi superior to the Hawk then ?

6 500lbs of thrust versus 12 500lbs! That gives a rate of climb of 9 300ft/min versus 20 000ft/min. I know which one I'd rather train Typhoon pilots in!

Admittedly those numbers don't come from a well-respected verified source, but I remember the M346 being tested in Flight International and that sort of climb rate being mentioned. They went on at some length about it having the sort of performance that would bridge the gap nicely between a simple jet like their M311 and something like Typhoon or JSF. The 128 seems like it'll perform much like the T1. I'm sure the kit will be quite phenomenal and very useful for training future Typhoon and JSF pilots, but wouldn't it be nice to have the performance too?

[EGAC]

"There was a nasty accident early on when the Chief Test Pilot of the Tucano was killed - I thought there were rumours of unpleasant behaviour at handling extremes, and / or poor escape facilities."

I gather that Alan Deacon ejected into the Irish Sea when the tail detached during an underwing weapons clearing flight for a Kenyan aircraft (Shorts exported Tucanos to Kuwait and Kenya).

The ejection was successful but he drowned before getting into his dinghy.

[Dan Winterland]

IIRC, flight test on a Kenyan aircraft, a drop tank was released, it hit the tailplane which came off. Successful ejection, but pilot couldn't get into dingy and died of hypothermia. It was winter and he wasn't wearing an immersion suit.

[Farfrompuken]

I was led to believe the testing team were investigating flutter on the control surfaces when it got all out of hand and the a/c broke up.

Also I believe the TP forgot to fasten the PSP connector which ultimately led to his sad downfall.

[x10ge]

The thread seems to have drifted a bit from Tucanos to Hawks and PC9s.
Just to put the record straight with facts, Mr Prescott was never the MP for Brough, his constituency is East Hull.
Saudi PC9s don't have a glass cockpits
And if you pilot people wanted to fly stick and rudder machines then you should perhaps train on them. As far as I can see the Typhoon stick and rudder is connected to a computer and when that fails your stick and rudder skills count for nowt.
Perhaps the Tucano should have been a PC9! But that is just my opinion.

[lgw]

With MFTS does anyone know what the end date for the Tucano?

[rudekid]

And if you pilot people wanted to fly stick and rudder machines then you should perhaps train on them. As far as I can see the Typhoon stick and rudder is connected to a computer and when that fails your stick and rudder skills count for nowt.

And I suppose all Airbus drivers have never driven a light fixed wing, engineers have never held a spanner and Lewis Hamilton has never driven a car with a stick shift.

Insightful, thanks.:hmm:

[PumpCockMixMags]

x10ge, thanks for the education, but Brough/East Hull doesnt really matter but it was the same fat man that lobbied parliament and hey presto, Hawk 128 forced on unsuspecting RAF.

Thread has gone from Tucano, Hawk and PC 9 because the 1st 2 aircraft happen to be in the RAF fast jet training system and the PC 9 could have been.

As for stick and rudder, Pilots are still learning stick and rudder techniques because every fast jet in the RAF has a stick and rudder of some sort regardless of how many computers are between pilot input and control surface output. RAF pilots are taught to fly each aircraft to it's performance limit whether those limits are imposed by computers or FRCs. The PC9 the RAF might have bought would have faced the same problem that the Tincan faces now, which is why so many airforces who have older PC9s are looking for an upgrade/replacement.

:mad:

[MostlyHarmless]

Sorry, but the *build* of the Tucano is utter Sh1t3. If you look at the underside there's about a million vents, seams and fasteners all over the shop. Kinda like the way I wrap Xmas prezzies - nice and tidy on the top but a dogs dinner underneath. If Shorts had built a PC9 under license I'm sure it'd be in the same boat...

[AR1]

Tucano replacement will be the new Hawk2020 - Turboprop Hawk derivative with low carbon engine. High efficiency photo voltaic cells embedded in the upper wing panels will power the cockpit electrics.

Word is that the initial build wont be cleared for inverted flight.;-)

[Roland Pulfrew]

lgw

With MFTS does anyone know what the end date for the Tucano?

Don't expect anything much before 2014. And that assumes that PR08 doesn't hit with more "savings" measures!! :ugh: