UK Government civilian research fleet

[Genghis the Engineer]

I'm just trying to get a mental handle on the number and types of civilian operated aircraft funded by the British government for research purposes. My motivation is simple - I've found myself working with one aircraft and alongside some others, which has highlighted that there's absolutely no homogenous structure to this, and I'd like to get a better feel for what's going on.

The aircraft that I can identify are:

BAe-146-301: 1 aircraft: Facility for Airborne Atmospheric Measurement/FAAM (NERC/Met Office)
Dornier 228: 1 aircraft: Airborne Survey and Research Facility/ARSF (NERC)
Twin Otter: 1 aircraft: British Geological Survey (NERC)
Twin Otter: 4 aircraft: British Antarctic Survey/BAS (NERC)
Dash-7: 1 aircraft: British Antarctic Survey/BAS (NERC)
Cessna 402: 1 aircraft: Ordnance Survey (OS)
Cessna 404: 1 aircraft: Ordnance Survey (OS)
Cessna 404: 1 aircraft: Environment Agency


Three questions to the (British part of the) house?

(1) Can anybody add anything to the list.

(2) Is it me, or have we (HM government) got an inappropriately diverse way of managing a lot of aeroplanes doing similar-ish work for ultimately the same funding body? Looking at that list you've got a mix of government and contractor crews, government and contractor ownership, three difference registration nationalities, and separate management scattered across numerous sites and organisations.

(3) Does anybody know of any attempts in the past to bring these numerous bodies together in any way - not necessarily managerially, but at-least talking to each other about practices and lessons learned? (Or even sharing crews, given that many of these aircraft are flying relatively low hours.)

G

[green granite]

Would not the entire Quinetiq fleet come under this heading?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Would not the entire Quinetiq fleet come under this heading?

Not really, so far as I know, they're all military registered and flown by military qualified aircrew. (Although I've no doubt that there are plenty of common lessons to be taught and learned between the Qinetiq and civil-government-research flying communities.) It's the "other lot" I'm trying to get a handle on - QQ is a fairly known quantity.

G

[angelorange]

Others that might qualify are:

NFLC - Cranfield University operated Jetstreams and Bulldog(s) ?
Cobham - Flight Inspection work and research all over EU - B200 and soon B350 King Airs

[SincoTC]

What about the C-130K purchased by the Met Office for use by its Meteorological Research Flight and modified by Marshall Aerospace?

Thinking about it as I type, although withdrawn from RAF service, I think it retained its original registration and I'm not sure who flew it for the Met Office, so probably not valid. Thought I'd mention it anyway JIC.

[chevvron]

Snoopy has been replaced by the '146 mentioned by Genghis.
It was crewed by regular RAF Aircrew (ie NOT specialists who had been through ETPS) who were based at Lyneham, although the aircraft was based at Farnborough until '94, then Boscombe until it retired.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Snoopy was retired about 2001 and is now at Marshalls, still on a military reg testing engines for the A400M. I must admit that I thought the aircrew whilst not TPs, were dedicated to the task and based with MRF (Met Research Flight) at Farnborough then Boscombe?

G-LUXE, the 146-301 ARA (Atmospheric Research Aircraft) replaced it in 2004/5 and is operated by FAAM at Cranfield as an all-civilian operation 50/50 funded by NERC and the Met Office.

Not sure I'd qualify NFLC as government - Cranfield University seem to happily do their own thing without any control beyond CAA regs.

However, thanks AO - the Cobham operated B200/B350 certainly are worth adding to my list; I'll see what I can dig out about them. Anybody know much about what they do?

G

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Perhaps engaged on flight trials rather than research, but how about the Meteors operated by Martin Baker?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Okay then, re-drafting the list...

"True" Civil

BAe-146-301: 1 aircraft: Facility for Airborne Atmospheric Measurements (www.faam.ac.uk)/FAAM (NERC/Met Office)
Dornier 228: 1 aircraft: Airborne Survey and Research Facility (http://arsf.nerc.ac.uk/)/ARSF (NERC)
Twin Otter: 1 aircraft: British Geological Survey (http://www.eufar.net/experiment/aircraft/specaircraft.php?num=39) (NERC)
Twin Otter (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk//living_and_working/aircraft_and_vehicles/aircraft/twin_otter.php): 4 aircraft: British Antarctic Survey/BAS (NERC)
Dash-7 (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk//living_and_working/aircraft_and_vehicles/aircraft/dash7.php): 1 aircraft: British Antarctic Survey/BAS (NERC)
Cessna 402: 1 aircraft: Ordnance Survey (OS)
Cessna 404: 1 aircraft: Ordnance Survey (OS)
Cessna 404: 1 aircraft: Environment Agency
Beech B200: 6 aircraft: Cobham flight inspection (http://www.flightprecision.co.uk/services.html)
Jetstream-31: 1 aircraft: NFLC/Cranfield University (http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/soe/facilities/nflc/page10344.jsp) (HEFCE) (interesting document (http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/board/2007/111/B11.pdf)


(17 airframes)

Military oversight / role, civil organisations

Qinetiq fleet
Meteor: 2(?) aircraft: Martin Baker
C130: 1 aircraft: Marshalls


G

[Cpt_Pugwash]

GTE,
Although not current, you could also add the BAe private venture G-HAWK and the sole EAP (ZF534) to your second list.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

BGG,

Yes, the EAP had a military serial, and the MoD contributed to it, but it was a private venture technology demonstrator, so arguably should be included.:)

[dangermouse]

Currently;

EH101 development aircraft (CIV01) G-17-510
PV Lynx demonstrators ZT800 or G-LYNX (now retired but STILL the fastest helo ever)

or the retired EH101 development aircraft ?

PP3 G-EHIL
PP8 G-OIOI

Didnt BAe have G-VTOL as well as G-HAWK?

:ok:

DM

[Cpt_Pugwash]

DM,
I'd forgotten G-VTOL.

How about G-ANAF (?) ex-RACAL/THALES trials DC-3?

[Fatty]

If government research can include photographing Spanish fishermen then you could include all the Fisheries patrol aircraft.

Similarly, if research into naughty behaviour were to be included you could include all police aircraft.

Fatty.

[GK430]

I wonder how the BN Islander G-ORED figures as a Gov't sponsored/funded a/c?

[chevvron]

GORED was/is not government funded; I remember when the late Capt Micky Munn - then OC Red Devils,was trying to get the money together to buy it as a replacement for GAXDH.
But add GVSTO single seat Harrier to the list.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Altough military registeerd, how about the Canberras which were operated by the Ferranti Flying Unit? A quick google throws up ......


B2/B8 WJ643
B8 BX185
B8 WT327
B2 WJ627
B8 WJ787
B2 WD953
B2 WD947

[hello1]

Is it me, or have we (HM government) got an inappropriately diverse way of managing a lot of aeroplanes doing similar-ish work for ultimately the same funding body? Looking at that list you've got a mix of government and contractor crews, government and contractor ownership, three difference registration nationalities, and separate management scattered across numerous sites and organisations.

Yup, that's about the size of it.

[John Farley]

G-VSTO was fully privately funded but it was used for demonstration not research

[Carry0nLuggage]

Accoding to Ms. Luggage, The Forestry Commission used to use have its own aircraft for aerial survey work. I doubt if they still operate it, more likely to sub-contract the work out. Have to wait till she's back later in the week for more info.

The most "air" they get these days is probably on the back of a long travel mountain bike :ok:

[Daysleeper]

Is it me, or have we (HM government) got an inappropriately diverse way of managing a lot of aeroplanes doing similar-ish work for ultimately the same funding body? Looking at that list you've got a mix of government and contractor crews, government and contractor ownership, three difference registration nationalities, and separate management scattered across numerous sites and organisations.

(3) Does anybody know of any attempts in the past to bring these numerous bodies together in any way - not necessarily managerially, but at-least talking to each other about practices and lessons learned? (Or even sharing crews, given that many of these aircraft are flying relatively low hours.)

The problem with trying to simplify this is that the point is to put a sensor package in a particular place at a particular time, The registry and type of airframe is not very relevant to the data gathering so long as it can fly the mission profile.

The BAS fleet need a rugged turboprop for obvious reasons. The FAAM aircraft was/is a one off provided by the prime contractor because it was going spare. The rest are based in the cheapest twin piston that has the endurance and lifting capacity for that particular mission.

There has been some talk in the past about this mix, but the sensor loads are quite diverse and the mission profiles and weather requirements equally so. The advantage of the old twin piston is the low airframe costs so it can be equipped for a specific role and then parked waiting for the weather. And the low hours may be over an annual basis but on "good" weather days they will all be flying their socks off.

These are generally niche operations that in the grand scheme of things pay peanuts but form a very significant part of the revenue of the smaller operators who actually do it. Trying to homogenise the contracts to a single management company would result in something that is probably larger than many could cope with but too small to attract the really big players. The loosing bidders would go out of business and then there would be no competition thus overall cost to HMG would go up.

Just my thoughts....

[Jetstream Rider]

Don't know if you have this covered already, but have a look at Directflight's website (they operate the Met Office 146/RJ), it seems they have Cessna 406's too - although not in a flight test role.

Directflight - Off-shore Aerial Surveillance (http://www.directflight.co.uk/surveillance.html)

[Bear 555]

The University (NFLC) operates J31 G-NFLA as a flying classroom, but interestingly also has J-31 G-BWWW on its AOC, operating it on behalf of BAE Systems conducting R&D mainly on UAV Systems.

If you assume some of that work is MoD funded then I guess it's public money?

[JimCrawford]

To clarify an earlier point: When Snoopy (C130 XV208) of the Met Research Flight lived at Farnborough there was indeed a dedicated military crew, not TP. I believe it was regarded by some Herc crew as a desirable posting because it involved considerable autonomy and diverse and interesting flying all over the world. Much more fun than trucking. The dedicated crew, based in the same building as the MetO science staff, also meant that they developed an expertise in understanding what we wanted and we developed a corresponding expertise in what they could provide. It also generated a strong mutual respect. When Snoopy went to Boscombe the crew was drawn from the Heavy Aircraft Test Squadron and so some continuity was lost, the science staff staying at Farnborough (although with a few false alarms to move with the aircraft) until the eventual split move to Exeter (MetO HQ) or Cranfield (FAAM).

Fond memories, some in a rather alcoholic haze, good times. :ok:

Jim

[Dusty_B]

I wouldn't call survey work 'research'...
And the OS is a totally self-funded agency, so the aircraft are not publicly funded.
GANAF however would fall into that category, but isn't dedicated to the task - she's for hire to whoever needs that type of platform. Same goes for any other ad-hoc charters that research agencies might want jacked up. And sticking with the DC3 theme, if you include the fisheries and MCA patrol aircraft, then you can include the Dakota and Electra spray ships too! That's a wide net...

[Trim Stab]

What about those civilian-registered DA42 surveillance aircraft also on the RAF register?

[nodrama]

With regards to the 5 BAS aircraft:

They spend at least 6 months of the year in (and ferrying to/from) Antarctica. In addition, some of them are sometimes used for shorter detachments to Greenland.

For the majority of the rest of the time they are in maintenance, nowadays usually in Canada, and I wouldn't class them as low-hour aircraft. In Antarctica they tend to fly as much as the weather will allow them to.

BAS operational planning can be 3 years + in advance and the 'flying season' is fairly intense, so the aircraft are pretty well tied up for BAS use only.

Equipment used for survey work, e.g. mag, camera, I believe is a NERC asset and not purely used by BAS.

[ninja-lewis]

Edinburgh University has a Diamond HK36 (G-GEOS) used for geosciences research and survey. Not sure how much, if any, funding is provided by NERC or sources outside UoE (which you could as a public source in it's own right really).