Flying the Canberra

[Trim Stab]

Looking at photos and plans of the Canberra, I would guess that Vmca was rather high (widely spaced engines, tiny rear vertical area - and with the ECM version in particular a large vertical area ahead of the CG). I'd guess then that Vapp would be fairly high and that single-engine go-arounds would not be pleasant?

Also, were RAF crews drawn from the FJ stream, or ME stream?

[Jig Peter]

This from memory, so I expect to be corrected by those with access to "the books" (and/or better memories) ..
Canberra asymmetric speeds depended on the Mark. The lower-powered Marks B2, PR3, T4 would have had a "safety speed" (as we called it) of 120 kts, while the B15's was 175 kts, on which, with all wing stores on, you kept a finger ready during and just after take-off to go for the "wing clear switch", to get into a safe speed region should one of Mr. Royce's motors do a nasty on you.
On the approach on one engine, you kept the flaps up (remember that they were either Up or Down, no in-betweens!) until you were sure of landing, and then you were committed. If you weren't nicely settled at that point, you overshot and went round again if you were wise and didn't want a fit of the knee-tremblers. Single-engined "Rollers" (touch & go) were out except for the T4, demonstrated by your instructor, because of the Avon's somewhat hesitant response from idling, while some Squadron pilots, such as IREs, would be qualified to perform them (again on the T4), after a check ride.
At the end of flying (or refresher training) you fouind yourself posted to the Canberra OCU (or not), but I don't think there was such a thing as "streaming" at that time (50s/60s) - your instructors assessed you and made "appropriate recommendations".

[ACW418]

Certainly in 1964 the guys who got posted to Canberras were from the fast jet stream (as opposed to the twin engined stream as nothing was hugely fast then). Come to think of it the Gnat was quite fast but I did my Advanced Flying training on Vampires as the Gnats were having initial serviceability problems.

ACW

[Pontius Navigator]

Trim Stab, your question abut experience is slightly limited. Remember that the Canberra was a significant force in the 50s and 60s. As a general split, the RAF was leaving the piston age and on its way to becoming an all-jet force with transport types being the exception (and of course RW).

The jet force was either fighter - Vampire, Meteor, Hunter, Javelin - or bomber - Canberra and V-Force. The Canberra was almost de rigueur the intro to the V-Force with copilots having one Canberra tour under their belts.

As the years wore on and the new aircraft matured so the criteria relaxed. With the introduction of the F4 and Buccaneer bombers in the late 60s and the Jaguar and Harrier bombers in the 70s they were clearly fast-jets compared with the Canberra. The other stream, in contrast, was multi-engine, Victor, AT, Shackleton etc. The Canberra was the odd one out but still tended to be an intro to fast-jet.

Many fast-jet crews were ab initio however other ab initio aircrew were sent to the Canberra, almost on a make or break basis, before moving to the modern FJ. With the reduction in the Canberra force to just the PR9 there as still a question of what to do with ab initio FJ aircrew that were not quite up to speed. The GR1 then became the make or break posting with the best crews going to Harrier, F3 and Jaguar.

A very broad brush and I shall probably be flamed but in defence I will say I was for a time on both FJ and ME Flying Trainng sub-committees.

[Flying Icecream]

Dear Trimstab
I shall shortly be enjoying the company,at my favourite pub/ folk- venue in Buckinghamshire, of a venerable Canberra pilot,(the landlord ),and will,of course,ask him for his views !!

[A2QFI]

I went to Bassingbourn straight from training, did 6 months on PR7s and then converted to PR9s. The only thing I can add to the information posted earlier is that it was not permitted to use more than 90% rpm on take-off as the speed at which full rudder could hold the full thrust of the live engine, if the other one failed, was something over 175 kts (as I recall it). If one did happen to use 100% the engines made a very distinctive extra noise which could be detected in the Sqn Offices and "discussed" after landing! A marvellous first tour I have to say!

[WarmandDry]

I remember a committal height of 600ft for a single engine approach. It was made clear after a tragic loss that if you were still IMC on a normal approach and lost an engine below 600ft by the rules you had only one option - to abandon the aircraft.
Engine failure after take-off was full rudder and 10 deg of bank then reduce the bank and power on the live engine until 1 ball width of slip.
Take-off in PR7 fully loaded with tip tanks was keep it down to tyre limiting speed then level at 5ft until safety speed before climbing.
As for FJ vs ME stream to Canberras - I came to Canberras via ME, Vulcans and Nimrods.

[CirrusF]

as the speed at which full rudder could hold the full thrust of the live engine, if the other one failed, was something over 175 kts (as I recall it).


That is a remarkably high speed, but about the range that I imagined it must have been, looking at the design.

Can you remember what Vso was (stall speed in landing configuration)? I'd imagine that it was quite reasonable, given the high aspect ratio straight wing. I'd guess that approach speeds were determined by the high Vmca, rather than the low Vso.

[aw ditor]

If one was ex Piston Provost/Vampire scheme in the 50s', prior to the OCU at Bassingbourn you did an "Asymmetric" course on the Meteor at Worksop. Excellent lead in to the Canberra and the basics of asymmetric', including leg-strengthening in the gym, were drummed into one. Don't get "low and slow"!

[big v]

90% was the standard rpm for take-offs. I can't remember the safety speed, although it might have been 180kts. We did a det to an airfield in a hot country where the there was no barrier and the over-run was very strewn with boulders. After some discussion, we decided on 100% take-offs. The safety speed was much higher (220kts IIRC). At max operational AUW, the event was rather less comfortable than a normal launch for me, sat in my cupboard up front.

[H Peacock]

The Canberra PR9 Safety Speed was 150kts for 90% rpm (8000lbs thrust per side) and went up tp 170 if you used full power (11,250 per side). 90% rpm was the norm, but it accelerated so quickly if you used full power that it was a struggle to get the gear up and locked in time, even when heavy.

We did practice assy approaches on a regular basis. IIRC we had to do 12 per quarter; 6 each of Viz/Inst and a mix of landings and overshoots. Given that we couldn't roll from an assy landing, this was the harder stat to maintain. The guys up front in the nose probably found those 6 overshoots per-quarter uncomfortable, especially when in the visual cct halfway round finals. More so when a lot of the guys on 39 had only ever flown a bit of T4 before being let loose in the mighty PR9. Lots of potential to screw it up if you didn't fly it correctly by levelling the wings and ensuring you maintained directional control (ball!!). That is probably why we used a VCH of 600ft. At least we had a powered rudder to help, but always flew these with the trim re-centred.

[WarmandDry]

If my memory is correct a B2 or T4 flew an asymmetric approach at 145kts, at 600ft you overshot on 1 engine or committed to landing. Once below 600ft you reduced speed and selected flap when certain of reaching the runway. This compared with a 2 engined approach at 120kts with 110kts over the threshold.
Night asymmetric was only with a QFI in a T4, so that meant you could extend the crew duty day to the 2 pilot 16 hours. 3 day trips and then a fourth in the T4 –with engine running pilot change over on the taxiway before 20minutes of night asymetric circuits.

[Fliegenmong]

Hmm interesting stuff, remember them fondly as a child, and even then they were almost a historic flight, but I was watching Temora's (?) Flying example at RAAF Amberley in 2008, and the was pure magic..especially the historic fly bys...Hudson, Meteor, Canberra, F-111.....possibly not seen anywhere else (?)...great stuff:ok:

[Trim Stab]

This compared with a 2 engined approach at 120kts with 110kts over the threshold


Interesting that you flew 2 engined approach so much slower than the asymmetric approach. If on a 2 engined approach you had to do a "real" go around, and then had a flame-out as you applied full power, would the aircraft have remained controllable?

[Jackonicko]

By the late 70s/early 80s (when I had some great vacation attachments to Canberra squadrons), all Canberra first tourist pilots were coming from the Hawk - some from Valley (4 FTS), and some after some or all of the TWU Hawk course.

It seemed to me that most (if not all) of the young Canberra pilots I met then spent a tour or two with 7, or the 'Tatty Ton', and then fed back to Brawdy, from where the bulk seemed to be streamed single-seat/fast-jet.

Senior blokes on the Canberra TF squadrons confirmed that one of the Canberra's most useful roles, in this, the twilight of its career, was in giving a bit of extra development to blokes who were FJ-capable, but who had narrowly failed to make the grade on TWU, perhaps 'slow learners' or perhaps having suffered a particular setback.

The Canberra was challenging, and flew a variety of roles (even within the TF squadrons) and clearly helped to turn young pilots who had (for one reason or another) failed training into productive fast jet pilots.

This was a problem, they said, as it made it harder to find Flight Commanders for the Canberra squadrons themselves - since all the first tourists bug.gered off back to the FJ world!

In later years, I became aware that whenever I went to a Harrier or Jaguar Squadron, I'd find a few pilots whose first tour had been on the Canberra - with the Jag Force, in particular, seeming to be riddled with PR9 mates.

[retrosgone]

Jackonicko

It isn't quite true to say that all ab-initio Canberra pilots were ex Hawk studes. I joined 360 Sqn at Wyton after the 100hr JP3 course and METS on the Jetstream (plus 231 OCU at Marham in 1980). Two further guys on my Finningley course also went to the Canberra, one to 100 Sqn and one to 7 at St Mawgan.

I would have to admit that Idid find the performance of the Canberra T4 a bit terrifying after the sedate Jetstream, and I joined the Sqn with about 240 hours total in my logbook - which made the AEO's in particular look at me a bit sideways.

It was a wonderful aircraft though, and for a first tour it could hardly have been bettered. On the original question of single engined safety speeds, as I recall it was about 140/145 knots for the T17.

[Jackonicko]

I stand corrected!

I should have been less definite.

My memories are of 79-82, and all I can say is that on 7 and 100, your course-mates eluded me!

Where did you go after the Canberra? Nimrod, I'm guessing?

I expect that you'll confirm the large number of blokes who did as I described, though, although perhaps it was different on 360?

[WarmandDry]

Trim Stab
Above 600ft no problem, or less so than on take-off, favourite place for certain QFIs to throttle back an engine. Full rudder, 10deg bank, throttle back and descend to accelerate to safety speed before climbing slightly cross controlled.
Below 600ft and below safety speed IMC - abandon (by the book) If VMC -runway in sight throttle back the live engine to retain control and accept undershoot or the grass or abandon. Certainly know of one case of a surge on short finals where they ended up touching down parallel to the rw but landed across the unoccupied QRA pans and all got out but with minor injuries (even the pax in the jump seat).
It was rumoured that the engines on the Canberra design were moved out from close to the fuselage as the Avons were looking to be very delayed and piston engines and props could then have been fitted in the interim.

[oldbilbo]

It's a long time ago, and far away, but I do recall the intricacies of 'planning for a refused TO' and the soi-disant 'Dead Zone' between the airspeed at which the jet got off the ground, the Single Engine Safety Speed ( at which a fit, prop-forward of a driver/airframe could maintain full rudder as well as enuff climb-out power on the live engine ~170-180knots ).

Simply put, if you're just airborne and low, below Safety Speed, and you lose an enjin - you're not going to get away with it.

The Canberra B12 with Avon 109s, operating out of >4000' AFB Waterkloof on a warm Highveld summer's day, struggled to push enough Bernouillis out the back. I was of a 'Cottesmore' vintage conditioned to calculate EMBS and Stop Speeds, correcting for density, runway length, temperature and AUW, etc. I was alone, on that squadron, as the only guy who bothered. Geek!

There was one such afternoon when, fully fuelled, just as the nose was being lifted at around 130kts, the port donk surged big. Natch, my man pulled them both back sharpish. There was no way we were going to fly.

'Stop Speed' - that max. below which a full emergency application of brakes might just stop us on the remaining tarmac - was around 83kts, as I recall. We were way above EMBS (Emergency Max Brake Speed), and the brakes would burn out to nothing well before we made a fast upwind-end departure and went off-roading. The overrun was a boulder field, then a gully, and coming up fast. A 'far-end fireball' beckoned. As per SOP's, I called "No brakes. Aerodynamic braking only. Hold the nose high...." But that was not going to be nearly enough.

The airbrakes were close to useless on those Cans, but we had urgent need of more Aero-D braking. Then I remembered the config for a steep descent....

"Open the bomb doors." The old ( no, nearly new! ) B12 opened up like the Space Shuttle, grabbing huge Aero-D drag.

That did it. It was like running into a snowbank. Not that anyone from around there had ever seen a snowbank. The speed washed off hard, and we were down below 60kts before the elevators stopped holding the nose up. A normal application of brakes to 'fast walk' left us with about 1000'. Phew!

No. That 'procedure' wasn't in the SOPs. Or anywhere else we'd read or heard, before or since. That's one of MY pages from EK Gann's 'Fate Is The Hunter'.....

:hmm:

[Jig Peter]

One more distinctive feature of Canberras with the early Avons was when there was a cross-wind for take-off: Line up facing about 30° (?) to the centre-line, accelerate the engines to about 5,000 (?) rpm, release the brakes and turn onto runway heading as the bird began to accelerate.
This was to let the 2-position inlet guide vanes sort themselves out, after which the sailing was plain.
My route to the Canberra was Vampire/Venom DFGA in 2TAF after FTS, short V-bomber tour, eventful ground tour in Berlin, Confrontation in FEAF on Canberras ... Nice way to end one's service ... :ok::ok::ok:


BTW. A comment above about it being difficult at one stage to find Canberra Flight Commanders makes me wonder now whether that was why I was made one ... (I didn't think so at the time !).

[WarmandDry]

Icing approach fixed RPM 2800 + or - 50. Descend only when cleared to land. When runway insight and clear aim 1/3 up and then close both throttles. Use flap to bring the touch down closer to the threshold. The PR7 had minimal anti-icing but before that it was chattering inlet guide vanes as around the 2800 RPM they did not know whether to be open or closed!

[Wander00]

Long time ago, but surely Icing Let Down was 5,800 rpm +/-50: I can also remember the Hydraulic Failure mnemonic for the Gnat!!

[FL575]

I seem to remember the 'Icing Let Down' was 6000 RPM, all the way down until sure of landing. 6000 was to be set before entering cloud during the let down. Remembering to nudge the RPM up as it decayed in the descent. Then using the airbrakes/bombdoors to (try!) to control the speed after levelling off at 1500ft, then the 'gear' to initiate final approach descent. No flaps until 'sure' of landing.

Gnat = STUPRECC. I do not think ANYBODY that flew the Gnat will ever forget that!

[WarmandDry]

Wander00,
Your right it was 5,800. Was 2,800 min RPM on an approach?

[Wander00]

FL575 - cannot recall - sounds more like idling - maybe one can find Canberre B2/T4/T17 pilots notes on-line! Wife says how come I can remember all this drivel, but come back without items on the shopping list!

[BSweeper]

Icing let down - 6000rpm as I recall on the ones I flew in. Plenty of good stories of the bomb bay full of Cyprus goodies (and luggage) which were lost when trying desparately to slow down. If you've done one you will remember clearly - it was like the let down in Aliens.

Anyone remember night practice asymmetrics with the QFI on board to get the monthly stats up? On the fourth pilot of the evening, hot crew switches were the norm, pilot heard to say, "600 feet, ball in the middle, on the glidepath, speed 145 - MY DECISION IS TO LAND". At 300 feet, a somehwat less authorative, "We're not going to make it". Strangled scream from QFI as my hand fondled the handle waiting for the roll, "Don't eject - bringing the other one up" Fortunately it did not not do what most Avons did i.e. cough and splutter. The debrief was interesting!

[LFFC]

Top Canberra tip - always remember to open the throttles a bit downwind after a run-and-break!

Oh - and don't carry swords in the bomb-bay! :ok:


Jacko,

There was a change from Hawk to METS ab-initios in about 1980.

[retrosgone]

Jackonicko

You are right about 360 Sqn, since lots of the pilots were RN of course - including my brother-in -law who came from Sea King "pingers" to the Canberra. The Navy regarded a Canberra tour as a lead in for potential SHAR pilots and we had a lot of people from the Wessex and Sea King, not to mention the Gannet!

Of course the great majority of RAF pilots joining were did come from various stages of fast jet training, and a great many went back down that route very successfully after some time on a Canberra Squadron.

In my case I had never expected to end up on the Canberra (though I am very glad I did) having wanted to be a truckie. I volunteered for the UAS after getting my QFI "blessing", and then spent another 14 years on the Nimrod.

Hard to forget some of the characters around in those days, including one or two truly legendary and eccentric RN Flight Commanders with experience of everything from the Sea Fury to the Harrier.

[old-timer]

:ok:

I was a sprog cadet at West Raynham c 1973 - fond memories of 100 Sqn (& 85 Sqn too ?) Canberras- TT 18's mostly ?

Sad time too as one had been lost the week before :(

[RetiredBA/BY]

What a wonderfully nostalgic thread about a wonderful aeroplane. But wasn't the safety speed in a B2, PR3, T4 140 knots ? I remember that speed being drilled into my head at Bassingbourn and having done many crit. speed checks after engineering I seem to remember that those crit. speeds weren't far short of 140.

I will always remember the Canberra as a wonderfully pleasant and easy machine to fly on two engines, but a very demanding machine on one, great training, fly it by the book and it works, stray and you're on your own !

Looking back on my career give me a Canberra for fun and sheer flying pleasure anyday, but if I had to do some asymmetric flying give me a 767 or a VC10. !

I still remember with a smile, the guy who opened his bomb doors to slow down on an icing approach, quite forgetting the full pannier, a depositing his goodies across north East Lincolnshire !

[FL575]

Some idea of the possible/probable asymmetric problems of the PR9 may be gained from the following tale. It should be remembered that there was not, of course, a two stick PR9. So the first time that a pilot flew it solo, was the first time that he flew it.

There were 2 crews on my conversion course, my crew and that of ‘M M’. After a few ‘solo’ sorties, we were at the phase of experiencing the different ‘wind up’ rates of the various RR209s.

Most people will know that, the time from ‘flight idle’ to full power could vary by quite a few seconds, with different engines. Also, as has been stated, most of the sharp end of the power came in the last 10% of the RPM range, i.e. from 8000lb thrust at 90%, to the max 11250lb at 100%.

To demonstrate this, and to give some practice at ‘rudder juggling’, the following profile was flown.

The aircraft was to be flown to FL200 (about 20,000ft to our non flying friends) and towards the top of the climb, the speed allowed to decay from climbing speed of 330kts/0.72M, to about 130kts (ish). Then a good old look around etc, and select 2 extra fuel pumps. The throttles were then to be fully closed, and the speed allowed to decay to 90kts, i.e. getting towards stalling speed. And, of course, way below the safety speed of 170kts.

At this point, both throttles were to be slammed fully open. This is where the fun started.

My Nav and I did this first, in the morning slot. And believe me it was an exciting ride. But I was lucky, and both of my engines wound up reasonably well together, and with judicious and fast juggling of the rudder pedals, the aircraft was kept basically straight and level.

Then, in the afternoon slot, it was the turn of ‘M M’ and his Nav. However they did not have the same aircraft that we had used in the morning.

After they had landed from the sortie, I went to have a chat with M M. As I approached him, I though that his eyes seemed a bit wild, and he had aged somewhat.

He told me that he had flown the aircraft as briefed, and slowed the aircraft down to 90kts etc. He then ‘whanged’ the throttles open. The stbd engine did its best, but just could not keep up with the port one. And just as the port reached 100%, the stbd was struggling past 70%. It was at this point that the PR9 flicked. He recovered the aircraft at about FL100.

[WarmandDry]

Canberras were “hand built” –
On an air test a T17 without tip tanks was flown to the approach stall ie power on uc down, as it stalled it rapidly rotated, not a flick but fast enough to end up nose down inverted. No engine surge, wings were level ball in the middle on entry. Next air test was with tip tanks on, predictions were for a more interesting reaction at the stall – crew had very tight harnesses but it was totally benign!
After a major a T17 just would not trim out laterally. Riggers did everything possible including changing the ailerons. Test after test and still it would not trim out. Then a chief took a piece of string from the nose to the port wing tip and when he tried to take it from the nose to the starboard tip it wouldn’t reach. After much research in ancient paper work it was discovered that as a B2 it had been fitted with 2 wings both within spec but outside the difference spec and the tail plane had been bent to compensate – on the major a new tail plane hade been fitted!

[rlsbutler]

Interesting that you flew 2 engined approach so much slower than the asymmetric approach. If on a 2 engined approach you had to do a "real" go around, and then had a flame-out as you applied full power, would the aircraft have remained controllable?

Certainly know of one case of a surge on short finals where they ended up touching down parallel to the rw but landed across the unoccupied QRA pans and all got out but with minor injuries (even the pax in the jump seat).

Another case, from my experience – 45 Sqn B15s at Kuantan in Malaya on detachment 1963-4. Experienced crew, doing a low overshoot from a standard full flap approach, had Trim Stab’s flame-out and settled as a result into a rubber plantation a mile or more upwind. In this case I remember that none of the crew had a scratch, but I fear the memory is not what it was. Suffice to say we all felt we were just not entitled to survive such an accident and that our friends, this time, were amazingly lucky.

Actually, flame-out it was not. We never heard of flame-outs at low level, although some crews regularly lost power in this way at height, in or around cu-nims.

The design of our Avon engines incorporated two deliberate fudges to account for a mismatch between the compressor at the front and the turbine at the back. The airflow was of course optimised for high RPM. The first fudge concerned the way the first stage of the compressor received the incoming air. The air might usually have been directed into the compressor by “stators”. The Avon’s equivalents were called “swirl vanes” and were not fixed but had two positions. As I remember, they changed position at 6100 RPM. If they did not the engine would surge on acceleration – but I never heard of this mechanism actually failing. Others have mentioned the icing drill – 6000 RPM was significant because the swirl vanes would at least be in their approach configuration whatever ice they collected.

The other fudge arose because, the compressor and the turbine being ganged together, at low RPM the compressor pulled in more air than the combustion stage could burn. Bleed valves would open to exhaust this excess air. If when the engine was being run up they remained open, then the engine would settle at the RPM at which they should have closed and would no doubt generate not enough thrust. As I remember, the critical range was 2800 to 3200 RPM. One would always watch the gauges to make sure this phase was safely passed, and then be more casually interested that the needles twitched appropriately going through 6100 RPM.

The Kuantan case was of a bleed valve failure. The aircraft was comfortably airborne and might have accelerated away if it was not for the flaps.

As has been mentioned, the Canberra’s flaps were either up or down. On selection, either up or down, they moved very deliberately. When down they were very effective.

So the flaps are down. One of the hydraulic pumps is underperforming along with its associated engine. If the pilot tries to raise them, both the undercarriage and the flaps would come up more slowly than normal. Apart from that, the pilot has at least one throttle bent forwards and an ache is developing in one leg. He may or may not be trying to bring the dud engine down and up again. But his eyes will be fixed on the air speed indicator and he will be disappointed to realise, knot by decreasing knot, that the flaps remain more effective than the one good engine. Happily he makes the one really critical decision and closes the good throttle – and the god of rubber plantations is kind to him.

[nazca_steve]

Dear all,

I am working on a book based on the 'Canberra experience' as told in the words of those that flew and serviced the type in the various air forces around the world (quite a few as you may well know). To cut a long story short, if would be interested in contributing, please check out the thread below, where full details of the project and basics about contribution are given:

http://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/474740-ee-canberra-book-contributor-request.html


Best regards to all,

Steve

[Pindi]

I joined the Canberra force from training in 1954, flew it for 4 1/2 years on T4, B2 and B6 and enjoyed every bit of it. It was a delight to fly and at the beginning it out-performed most of the types Fighter Command could launch against us on exercises. Its achilles heel though was the awful heating/cooling system. After an hour or so at or above 40,000 ft everything in the cockpit was covered in rime and it stayed that way until it began to melt during the let-down, drenching the nav plotter's charts unless he remembered to put them away. For sorties of 3 hours or more we were each given a couple of chocolate biscuits and a small can of orange juice and if one delayed opening the orange juice for three hours or so it was frozen solid. Operating the Canberra in a tropical climate was probably worse. One was soaked through with sweat by the time the checks had been done and then frozen at operating height. Nevertheless, we got used to it but in this respect it was certainly a young man's aeroplane.
I'm not sure that asymmetric in the Canberra was entirely the bogey which seems to be its legacy and I suspect that conscious lack of practice played its part. Quite early on I decided to make an asymmetric landing as often as I could and it gave me enough confidence to be much less windy about the lurid tales of others who, I suspect, steered well clear of asymmetric except when a check ride forced it upon them !

[nazca_steve]

Cheers for that, Pindi, that describes the bake or freeze aspect of the Canberra very well. On some Cans I've seen little fans in the cabin for the pilot and nav, mounted on the coaming in some cases - did you have these or was this most likely a later mod?

Asymmetric handling is such an interesting subject (for the armchair enthusiast like myself, never having had to do it!). I know for a fact that the Rhodesians flew some long range ops on one engine for the outbound leg so as you say, it seems it was possible beyond landing with some practice and careful handling. I do understand this was considered rather dicey by the RhAF pilots themselves though and they were loath to have a flame out in this situation.

I will send you a PM, as I would love to hear more about your time, especially as you came on around the heyday of the aircraft.

Best regards,

Steve

[LFFC]

Here's an interesting page on Canberra sorties during the Falklands War (http://modelingmadness.com/reviews/korean/gb/calcan.htm).

They didn't stand much chance against Sea Harriers.

[BBadanov]

Steve: On some Cans I've seen little fans in the cabin for the pilot and nav, mounted on the coaming in some cases

Steve, you may have seen 229 in California, that had the fans. We had them - if memory serves me correct - in all our aircraft, the B.20s and T.21s. Operating in a tropical environmenmt, we needed them.

Just worth noting here, the B.20 started production in Australia based on the B.2. The first 27 were basically B.2s, with what we called Avon Mk.1s, limited integral wing fuel tanks (total was 14.6k LB), and bugger-all avionics. The remaining 21 B.20s were based on the B.6, with Avon 109s, increased integral fuel (all up 17.6, and 21.6 with tips) and Green Satin and GPI mk.4 (I think). Before deployment to Vietnam in a USAF wing, we had added TACAN, UHF and armour plate for pilot and nav.
I always thought it strange the upgunning from B.2 to B.6 didn't warrant a new designator - it would have been B.22 at that stage.

The T.21s were a mixed bag, and didn't have the T.4 solid nose. Two were modded from the ex-RAF B.2 prodn pattern aircraft, and five were modded from the first B.20 production - so all had the clear bombaimer nose.

Note, RAAF always operated the bomber with 2 crew - pilot and nav, not the 2 navs the RAF strike/attack aircraft had.

Lot of fun the Canberra - 2500 hours in five and a half years, those were the days! :ok:

[Milo Minderbinder]

I can't help but feel theres a degree of irony somewhere in that the Canberras were - at least at one point -flying from Trelew, a Welsh colony in Patagonia

[nazca_steve]

Now you're talking my language ;). As an Anglo-Argentine myself, the usage of the Canberra in the Argentine Air Force is an area of, shall we say, mild interest to me (putting it mildly indeed!). A few years back I got in touch with a fellow Canberra nut down there by the name of Marcelo Siri, whose late father had been a nav from the late 70s to his death from cancer in 1983. He flew a couple of ops during the Falklands whilst suffering from his terminal illness, despite the orders of the station surgeons and the best intention of his comrades. He literally had to be carried to and from the aircraft, and whilst lying prone in the nose cone, the pilot was audibly aware of his great pain.

Regardless of any politics surrounding the Falklands War (both then and now), the bravery and absolute professionalism of the air and ground crew of the Grupo 2 de Bombardeo is, for me, without question. Consequently, we started an Association down there, reuniting former G2B personnel and getting the Canberra the recognition it had been long overdue in a conflict where Mirages and Daggers dominated the public eye on both sides. As a result, we've taken big strides in restoration work for B-101 and B-102, two Falklands survivors. B-109, another B.62, is preserved in the Museo Aeronautical in Buenos Aires, in superb condition, and I had the pleasure of sitting in both it and B-101 (incidentally, the one flown by Roland Beamont on trials for the 20th aniv. of the Canberra in 1969). There is also now talk of attempting to do something for the rather folorn B-112, the only remaining T.64 trainer.

Regarding the irony of Trelew being a Welsh colony, yes, it is without doubt with noting. Their combat ops are a whole separate discussion which I am more than happy to get into any time.

For more reading on the subject (admittedly, all in spanish), check out the web site Marcelo and I built:

Canberras Argentinos: BAC Canberra B.Mk.62 y T.Mk.64 de la Fuerza Aerea Argentina (http://canberrasargentinos.com.ar/)

and in particular, my visit in English: (Canberras Argentinos (http://canberrasargentinos.com.ar/canberra-beenyvisita.html))

tons of photos there which tell a good story even if you can't read spanish. I am happy to translate anything, and some of the war stories on there will be translated and form part of the Argentine experience in my book. At the very least, former pilots and navs on here may be interested to check out the cabin photos to compare notes on the B.62 layout, and of course to see an SFOM gun sight fitted for those who never had interdictor experience.

[nazca_steve]

BBadanov,

Good notes on the B.20 and 21. Have to agree with you on the strange decision not to change the numbering when GAF made the uprated batch, but I suppose it all adds to the enjoyable confusion that is the international Canberra :)

I am in touch with a former 2 Sqn nav over at the Canberra Crazy - Login (http://canberratalk.conforums.com/) forum who has some cracking war stories from Vietnam. Just as with the Argentines and Rhodesians, I have a lot of respect for the Aussies and their usage of the Can. As you point out, another country that only flew with two crew. Seems that despite the 'book' seeing the need for three crew initially, Petter had it right from the start with his original B.1 design that it could be done with pilot and nav only. Very interesting about Sky Dump (Skyspot) and blind bombing, and of course your RAAF stats on accuracy and minimal losses compared to B-57 crews are worth noting. That said, I am not making a truly fair comparison considering the USAF role for the Can was more of an interdictor-bomber, and in no way meant as a sleight on the American crews who were bloody brave and professional too.

[BBadanov]

nazcar_steve: Very interesting about Sky Dump (Skyspot) and blind bombing, and of course your RAAF stats on accuracy and minimal losses compared to B-57 crews are worth noting. That said, I am not making a truly fair comparison considering the USAF role for the Can was more of an interdictor-bomber, and in no way meant as a sleight on the American crews who were bloody brave and professional too.

Yes - the RAAF Canberra only operated in SVN, and not "up north", or supposedly in Cambodia or Laos, where a lot of the B-57 work was done. RAAF missions I would estimate to be about 20% skyspot, and 80% level visual bombing under FAC control, over the years 1967-71.

They were embedded in the 35th TFW at Phan Rang as there were 2 ANG B-57 units there - I think 8 TBS and 13 TBS (or was that TFS?) - but these were replaced by F-100s by 1969. The US crews were great - but operated in hotter places and in a very demanding dive bomb role.

[nazca_steve]

Roger that, I have heard some amazing stories about the cooperation between FACs and Callsign Magpie, really good team work and results. You should pick up the new Osprey book entitled 'B-57 Canberra Units of the Vietnam War' by T.E. Bell. Aside from telling the US story (a damn good read), there is a chapter on 2 Sqn and some really nice profile art for B-57s and B.20s.

[BBadanov]

You should pick up the new Osprey book entitled 'B-57 Canberra Units of the Vietnam War' by T.E. Bell.

Ok, thx for the heads-up. :ok:

[Tankertrashnav]

Certainly in 1964 the guys who got posted to Canberras were from the fast jet stream (as opposed to the twin engined stream as nothing was hugely fast then).


I guess Lightning Mate isn't following this thread or he may have had something to say about that statement ;)

[Wander00]

From my course at Valley (22 Gnat) there were postings to Lightning, Canberra strike and PR (and me to strike Canberra course then 360) and V Force. Don't think anyone got Hunters

[Samuel]

Pure nostalgia! Final flypast of an RNZAF B12 prior to sale to India.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e33/Shadblat/CanberraFarewell-1.jpg

[rlsbutler]

BBadonov

The first 27 were basically B.2s, with what we called Avon Mk.1s, limited integral wing fuel tanks (total was 14.6k LB), and bugger-all avionics. The remaining 21 B.20s were based on the B.6, with Avon 109s, increased integral fuel ...

On 45 Sqn at Tengah 1962-4, I thought we had a rather guarded relationship with the Canberras at Butterworth (2? Sqn RAAF). They seemed a bit grumpy and their mess was a bit dull. We never seemed to operate together as we did with the RNZAF B12s on their regular deployments into theatre.

I have a clear (if unreliable) memory that, while the Aussie aircraft had the engines of the B6 type, very importantly they lacked the stronger wing that we assumed was essential for low-level work. The integral wing fuel will have taken some of the load, of course.

Fairly soon after I arrived on 45 Sqn, before we swapped our B2s for the B6 type (actually B15s), we lost a lovely crew when its aircraft broke up while bombing on China Rock. So there was a sense that the Aussies were unnecessarily inviting bad luck by persisting with the old and weaker airframe. I have always assumed that a weaker airframe would have cramped their style when they were later deployed to Vietnam.

Perhaps the Aussies operated rather staidly to compensate. That would fully explain why brash young chaps like me were a bit sniffy of of them and why (if true) the B20 fleet, in peace and conflict, maintained a better loss rate than the RAF and USAF Canberra forces.

[nazca_steve]

Very interesting indeed. I can't say with any certainty that the older wing was the reason behind a more conservative approach to ops in Vietnam. What I do know is that the Aussie crews were fitted with optical bomb sights which their USAF counterparts in the B-57 did not have, hence they were able to visually bomb from straight flight and low level rather than dive-bomb. I have been told that in some of these sorties they received shrapnel damage from their own bomb runs, so pretty low. Nevertheless, yes, they would most likely avoided low-level, high-G strike action like the B.15/16 were intended to fulfill. I will happily be corrected if this was also part of the RAAF Canberra role.

Whatever the case, the Canberra wing fatigue was certainly an issue for the Rhodesian Air Force, and stress was a considerably limiting factor for them. Nevertheless, when you consider they were operating essentially unmodified B.2s under sanctions and a handful of original spares, their technicians worked miracles to keep as many flying for as long and under combat conditions for so long. While not the only non-RAF operators to modify and adapt their Cans for local demands, I think the RhAF were pretty amazing in what they achieved in making the Canberra a viable COIN bomber.

I am assuming that the Argentine and Ethiopian B.62 and 52 had strengthened wings for their underwing payloads, despite still being based on the B.2 engine series.

[Wander00]

Never forget seeing the crack in the spar in the undercarriage bay of a T4 at Watton

[t43562]

There are a few short video snippets showing RhAF Canberras in this starting from about 4m30s in (although there are more pics of Hunters etc)

Pride of Eagles: The Rhodesian Air Force - YouTube

[goudie]

This has probably done the rounds before but perhaps worth telling on a thread about the Canberra.

Whilst serving at Bassingbourn during the early 60's, as a cpl tech, I recall an incident (which later appeared in 'Air Clues') regarding a train of events that could have been disastrous.
A student crew were on a night sortie at 20,000ft or so when the pilot called up the nav for a routine oxygen check. In spite of several attempts he couldn't make contact so, believing the nav may be suffering from anoxia he put the a/c into a spiral dive. The nav, upon seeing the altimeter unwinding at great speed tried to contact the pilot, to no avail. Believing the pilot may be suffering from anoxia he unstrapped and went forward to find the pilot hunched over the controls (apparently he was peering closely at the panel). The nav, convinced the pilot had passed out and that they were out of control attempted to pull back the stick. At this, the pilot looked up and decided that although the nav. had come round he was still suffering from the effects of anoxia. After a bit of a tussle over the controls the pilot took the hydraulic emergency pump handle and hit the nav on the head telling him to 'go back to his seat' or some such words! It transpired that the intercom had failed and they eventually made a safe landing.
The result of this incident was a mod consisting of two dolls eyes for each crew member indicating that his, and the other crew member's oxygen was flowing.
As 'Wing Commander Spry' commented 'a good story to tell in the bar but also a good illustration of how things can quickly go wrong.'

[nazca_steve]

Hi Goudie,

indeed a fascinating story, and yes, really illustrates how things can 'spiral' out of control. Lucky it ended well and the mod came out of it. Do you (or anyone else) happen to remember where and when this incident happened? If not no probs, as it is your recollection from the time, and I'd like to include it in the book. If you are ok with this, could you PM me your details for crediting?

I am sure there are a lot of good anecdotes buried in threads on this forum, so if you come across any you think of note, please do post a link on here and I will track down the authors.

t43562 Love that vid, great to see the RhAF fleet there, and of course the B.2 coming in there...nice crosswind gust at just before touch down at 4:36. I know this is a Canberra thread, but would you look at that glorious Hunter at 4:56. I see a lot of glossy paintwork here and roundels too, which shows this is still before the height of the 'Strela' era when these disappeared. Great vid.

[BSweeper]

Goudie

I have also heard that story and from what I can recall your account is accurate.

I have also "tussled" with a pilot but for a different reason. We were down to fly a "LoPro" (Low Level Probe), a particularly useless "war" mission. The concept was to formate below an MRR aircraft (a Vulcan in this case (27 Sqn?)) flying at high level 35K+ and when they wanted an id on a surface contact, they would point us in the right direction and launch us at about 40nm. We would start a stop watch for ranging and descend at max rate, which for a Canberra, with ABs, was about 8-10k a minute. There was a nav (the funniest man I ever met) in the back and I acted as the observer looking for the contact in the front next to the pilot (I was small enough to be able to stand next to him).

The pilot, who was on his first flight after just coming out of hospital following an operation on his sinuses, collapsed in agony at 12,000ft. As a very junior nav (3rd month into my first tour) this was a big shock as we were about 1.5 minutes to stumpfing in. After the "tussle", the pilot came round and we slowly climbed back up until the pain eased. The sortie was called off and we made a very very slow descent into St Mawgan.

Yes, I know. What lunatic would put himself on such a profile after such an op. But hindsight is a wonderful thing.

The funny nav? - I'll give you a clue. He once flew on 7 Sqn, on 7/7/1977 with Air Cdre Dick de Severne (who I think was some wheel in 18Grp) as his pilot. After his last 1369, I asked him what the boss said (knowing he had done b***r all for his last year in the RAF). "Very complimentary " he said, "he's made me his sexual advisor". "Really" I remarked, quite astounded (and niaively). "Yes",he replied, "He distinctly told me - when I want your f***ing advice S****, I shall ask for it".

[nazca_steve]

Sounds rather frightening there, I cannot imagine tussling with anyone in the confines of a Canberra cockpit would ever be easy, let alone with my life in danger and the a/c in a descent. One question about the LoPro sortie you were flying - if I have followed it correctly the Vulcan was looking to pick you up on its radar, or by visual contact? You said you were acting as observer looking for the contact but why was this necessary if the purpose was for them to pick you up on radar? Bear with me here, I know I may well have missed something but am curious.

[rjtjrt]

nazca_steve

I don't wish to derail this excellent discussion on the Canberra but I presume you are aware of the book on the Rhodesian Airforce?

"Winds of Destruction: The Autobiography of a Rhodesian Combat Pilot" by P. J. H. Petter-Bowyer.

Again please don't let this hijack this thread.
John

[diginagain]

I'm sure a SME will be along shortly, Steve, but my understanding is that the MRR (Maritime Radar Reconnaissance) Vulcan, having picked-up a surface contact (ship) on radar, would dispatch the Canberra to get a visual identification.

[BEagle]

Correct. Having done some of this boring boat-spotting stuff on 35 Sqn as our secondary role, I can confirm that the 'LoPro' involved joining with a Canberra, updating its clockwork nav kit from the Vulcan's NBS by the highly secure method of reading out the lat/long over a UHF frequency :\ before despatching the Canberra off to identify something we'd seen on radar... I think we gave him the target's range and bearing from some reference point rather than giving him lat/long over the RT though...:rolleyes:

The Canberra would descend towards the ocean, wind itself up to max chat and attempt to identify the surface contact visually. We expected that, should we ever have had to do this nonsense for real, probably all we would have heard would have been "It's a KrestaARGHHH!" as the Canberra was shot down.

'Selfpro' was much more fun and we once spent a happy few hours on a Solar Flare charging around the Mediterranean chasing Greek tankers which the nav team had selected as our target. Trouble was, we weren't deconflicted from other players and were soon on the receiving end of a snottygram from some boat person at some maritime HQ for having blundered into an area being used by a Nimrod which had been shadowing some Sovietski subski. Our DetCo back in Malta asked them why they hadn't warned us in advance and was stuffily told that their operations were 'secret'. "Tough $hit, sunshine, we'll be around for another week, so expect more of the same....CLICK!" was the response.

[Argonautical]

The late Chris Dixon voiced an opinion on the weak wings of the Rhodesian Canberras during the "Green Leader" raid:-

"Oh Sh1t, I hope the fcuking wings don't fall off"

This web site has more specific info on the problem :-

Rhodesia Aviation (http://www.a2oxford.info/pages/rhodesia/)

Here are two items about it, firstly about the crash of R2510 :-

English Electric Canberra B2. 'R2510' of N.5 Squadron, Rhodesian Air Force.
This aircraft was returning to the Airwork hangar in April 1971 after a flight test, having undergone major maintenance with Airwork who had the contract from the RhAF for this work. Many of the Airwork employees were ex Royal Air Force with years of experience on the British jet aircraft used by the Rhodesian Air Force. This particular aircraft is reported to be ex RAF 'WJ578 of 27 Squadron RAF before being acquired by Rhodesia in 1959. I remember the shock I felt when later that year I heard that this aircraft had crashed off the end of '06' at Salisbury on the evening of 16th November 1971, both crew members were killed, Fl.Lt.A.G.Roughead (pilot) and Air Lt.G.N.Robertson (Nav). The aircraft had suffered a 'Frame 21' failure, a crack within the frame of the main wing/airframe attachment point caused by metal fatigue. This became a serious problem for the Rhodesian Air Force Canberras, many being grounded in later years.

Secondly, about a T4, R2175 :-

This aircraft was grounded in 1974 because of a cracked wing spar, a big problem with the Canberras in the Rhodesian Air Force, brought about by metal fatigue in Frame 21 within the fuselage of the Canberra, this was the main wing attachment frame. A known problem as these aircraft were early Canberras using metal alloys developed during WW2, this was resolved in later Canberras, such as those supplied to the SAAF which utilised more modern metal alloys in their construction. Flights at low level in bumpy conditions which put a great strain on the wing attachments were avoided but many 5 Squadron aircraft were grounded as time went by.

[nazca_steve]

Hello John and Argonautical,

Talking about Canberras of any nation, let alone Rhodesia of which I have a good deal of interest is NEVER derailing a discussion! I could talk about this till the cows come home. W of D is an excellent read of which I finished late last year. I have since been in contact with Peter PB and also Mike Hamence, co-author of Canberra in Southern African Service, who have both been extremely helpful and in a large part inspired me to crack on with this project. Ref the wing spar problems, Mike did a massive amount of research on this, most of which is over my head, but suffice to say, the RhAF crews were brave, and the ground crews miracle-workers.

Beagle and diginagain,

thanks very much for clearing up how MRR with the Vulcan worked, there's the nitwit me thinking the Canberra itself was the contact! Won't be the first or last time I commit a proper civvie blunder like that, as always cheers for enlightening me. Beagle, PM coming your way about your 35 Sqn experiences.

[AR1]

Any one ever take part in the pure theater that was the 7Sqn Canberra Bombing role display at IAD St Mawgan? - Ignoring the oily explosions, the flying was excellent.

[nazca_steve]

Beagle,

just wanted to make sure you got the PM I sent you after your post #58. Also, if you have any other stories like that - you've got a very entertaining way of writing and would love to hear more.

Best,

Steve

[options770]

I have done the Lopro from both sides, on 27 Sqn despatching a Canberra to do the run but as stated, Selfpro was much more fun.

On 7 Sqn at St Mawgan we did the Lopro but working with a Nimrod which was a much more valuable asset then the Canberra. It was more covert with the Nimrod broadcasting blind and we formatted below it in a racetrack oriented towards the target. Once outbound the Nimrod opened his bomb doors, when he closed them we were inbound at 80 miles at which point we dropped to low-level and flew in calling contacts as we saw them. The plan was if we stopped broadcasting then they were probably hostiles!:bored:
One time I did it, as we reached the target group of fishing vessels a voice from the ether said 'don't pull up'. The Nimrod had followed us to see what we did, I raced him home from there. :O

[nazca_steve]

Dear Options770,

Very interesting story there, perhaps a daft question on my part (I do ask a few of them), but what was the significance of the Nimrod opening/closing its bomb doors?

Next question, can you tell me where you were operating? Your mention of your silence equating to your demise hints at something interesting...

Who won the race by the way? ;)

[options770]

We were listen only on the Nimrod frequency and they were only broadcasting positions so it was a method of launching silently without alerting the enemy!
We broadcast on a different frequency on which the Nimrod was listen only. The idea was to give us a better chance of survival if it was for real. We did the practice in the south west approaches, probably a Spanish fishing fleet.
As for the race, well I did a practice approach at St Mary's in the Scilly Isles and we were still in the bar before the Nimrod Landed :)

[nazca_steve]

Brilliant stuff, Options, cheers for that. Shifting topics a bit, did anyone here have experience with target tug flying (TT.18s, B.2s) or AI training with the T.11? I would love to hear something about these tasks, especially the latter, as it seems those with T.11/19 experience are pretty rare these days.

[spectre150]

nasca

I was on 100 Sqn in the early eighties and did a lot of target towing. It was dull, boring work so I am not sure I can offer much of interest! We towed air-to-air targets (banners) for the Lightning and F-4 guys (I think all of our jets had the banner attachment and release mechanism so we would have used B2and E15 for that role; sleeve targets (a bit like a windsock IIRC) behind a TT18 for the Navy 4.5 inch guns down on the South Coast and Rushton targets for the Rapier firings at Benbecula (we would be detached to Kinloss for this). As the nav, it was my job on the latter task to press a switch to deploy the target (I seem to remember it unwound to 19 to 20 thousand feet behind the Canberra), monitor the tension in the cable then press another switch to wind it back in after the firing detail. As the Canberra turned away from the firing point (with the target still heading inbound) you could usually see the Rapier in flight but that was about as interesting as it got.

We had a LOT of fun on the sqn in those days, but it was not flying related - :ok:

[BBadanov]

We did target towing with the B.20 after our bombing role ceased with withdrawal from Vietnam in 1971.

The B.20 was fitted with a lug on the underside, just aft of the camera hatch, I think it was. The target (a dayglo coloured net, "banner" we called it) was layed on the runway after we taxyed in by about 1500 ft. The banner had an aluminium "spreader bar", about 6 ft wide I think, with a couple of discs on it to acts as wheels as it was dragged along the R/W. The cable with an explosive shear bolt was then connected to the lug, and the Canberra took off in a fairly steep climb-out.

Out over the ocean, then set up in an orbit to be joined by a 4-ship of Mirages. They would call "in live" off their perch, shooting ball ammunition. Each fighter in the 4 had a colour applied to their rounds - blue, green, black, or magenta.

At "bingo" for the shooters (not for the Canberra, it could stay all day), they would regroup and go home, and we would pull the banner back home. We would line up off the edge of the runway at 1000ft to drop the banner on the grass - the nav would be down the nose and use the bomb button to fire the explosive bolt to release the banner.

The "knuckleheads" would then retrieve the banner, and take back to their squadron to count up the various colours. Simple.

It was always a jape to head back when they were counting and ask "Who was firing blue?". "Well add one more, we got a blue one through the fin". haha :E

We did these up in Butterworth (Malaysia) too, up twice a year for our squadrons there - that was known as "TUGBUT". Good fun :ok:

Hardly a demanding job, but it was better than a desk as we waited for a FJ position.

[options770]

I did target towing using the TT18 on 7 Sqn at St Mawgan. We only did ground to air, so I have no experience of air to air.

We flew with a sleeve which we deployed from a canister in the air and towed against HMS Cambridge at Plymouth for Naval Gunfire training. I seem to remember the tow length was 6000ft. We had two canisters on each winch so in theory if the sleeve was damaged we could jettison and deploy another. The sleeve could not be recovered so we normally dropped it on the airfiled next to the runway for re-use. We occasionally towed for small arms anti-aircraft training on the ranges in South Wales. I did a Sunday for the TA and after 20,000 rounds of a variety of weapons we dropped the sleeve on the beach for them, it was undamaged!

We also towed the Rushton target in the Hebrides ranges for Blowpipe and Rapier Missiles, for blowpipe the tow was 3 miles and for Rapier it was 5 miles. At missile launch we were behind the launcher in a turn so there was no danger. The skill was in keeping the target level because as we turned it tended to drop, so the turn was always a climbing profile to maintain the target at 500 ft.

[nazca_steve]

Evening all,

first up, thanks a lot for these seemingly mundane banner towing details. Trust me, it's not to me ;).

Generic question to all: BBadanov mentioned r/t contact with the Mirages in his post; was this a common procedure in towing and what were typical radio exchanges if so? Were corrections to flight path ever called out from the shooter or was it all down you to and what pattern you were supposed to fly? In air-to-air towing did you try to make things difficult for the shooter?

BBadanov also mentioned a 'blue' hit on the fin - did anyone else ever get more than they bargained for or was this pretty rare?

Spectre150 and Options770 could you elaborate a little on the towing you did for the Navy's guns. What kind of runs would you have to make for them, for instance what altitude and rough distance from the ship, could you see it and the shell explosions or would these have been behind you/out of line of sight?

Options770, that TA shoot sounds interesting, not something I have heard of before - what kind of speed and altitude did you make your runs at? Could you actually see the shooters? I am guessing you would have had to be have been fairly close in for small arms to have even stood a chance...although you say they were off the mark anyway!

Finally, you all probably know I am working on a book about all this; if not, the link to the main book thread is over here:

http://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/474740-ee-canberra-book-contributor-request.html

Seeing as I am light for content on towing, I'd love to be able to use your anecdotes with permission of course. If so let me know and I will send over a PM. Cheers.

BBadanov, I think I sent you a PM about your RAAF experiences (not sure, I have sent a fair few out recently). You mentioned B.20s in Vietnam - I would very much like to talk to you about that, but perhaps that is best done in the other thread or PM if you prefer. I probably would have endless questions that might not be appropriate for his exact thread.

[BBadanov]

Steve

"Generic question to all: BBadanov mentioned r/t contact with the Mirages in his post; was this a common procedure in towing and what were typical radio exchanges if so? Were corrections to flight path ever called out from the shooter or was it all down you to and what pattern you were supposed to fly? In air-to-air towing did you try to make things difficult for the shooter?

BBadanov also mentioned a 'blue' hit on the fin - did anyone else ever get more than they bargained for or was this pretty rare?"

R/T was pretty standard RSO type banter. That is, the Canberra was the RSO for the Range (it was over water, a designated danger area, but fishing boats would wander in!).

You would find a clear area and start a left hand orbit. Fighters would come on freq: "Dildo check", "2", "3", "4". "Loud and clear. Tug, Dildo on freq, 4 aircraft for live." "Dildo, Tug at BUT 270, 45 miles, 10,000ft." "Roger"

"Tug, have you visual, in dry" "Dildo, clear dry." They would set up their pattern from the perch, to get 4 aircraft in a pattern of equal spacing". Only took one rotation, then in live. Each would have to be "cleared live", and each would call "off safe".

When fueled out or fired out, all needed to check "switches safe" and RTB.

That was about it, exciting huh? :hmm:

Try to make things difficult for the shooter? You gotta be sh*tting me, right? := No, steady 30 degree level banked turn. We are talking real bullets here.

No hits on any aircraft to my knowledge, was only joking about that. Heard the supersonic rounds go by very occassionally, I guess the shooter didn't have enough angle off. I seem to remember the cable length was 1300 ft.

Re Vietnam - I have written plenty about it - will PM you with a few references, can't be bothered frankly regurgitating it all again.

[options770]

For the beginning of each course we would do 'Dry' runs using the sircraft as the target while the crews learnt and practised the procedures. This would usually take 2 days. Then we went 'Hot' flying the target straight and level at 1000' on 6000' of cable aimed directly at the gun. Shots were fired using 4 1/2 inch break up shells when the aircraft was overhead the gun so out of the firing arc. We couldn't see the shot but could hear them, and on the rare occasion there was a good hit, you felt it

[dalek]

I spent time on 85 Sqn 1972 - 1975. We towed banners for air to air only. The banner was a mere 900ft or so from the tug and the Canberra was known to appear in the gun camera of the Phantom and Lightning.
On 7Sqn at St Mawgan from 1977 to 1980. We towed Rushton targets some 18 to 24 thousand? feet behind the aircraft.
I don't remember a Blowpipe ever coming close to the target. Rapier was better. I once flew two sorties on a Baltic range for a German Geppard. The Rushtons were destroyed within a second or so of being acquired.
The big bombing raid that completed the Air Day was always great fun.

[BEagle]

Surely there must be some ex-100 Sqn mates who can describe the saga of the Machrihanish escape tunnel?

Another of those typical aircrew japes of the 1980s - until the farmer's tractor tipped over.

EX PROFIT against 360's EW jets was sometimes amusing. Comms jamming could be entertaining; noise itself wasn't much fun, but someone once broadcast German 'oompah' music. When they stopped and a singularly usless GCI controller came back on the air, another F-4 piped up with "Can we have the music back, please?". One of the more effective was the rebroadcast of another PI flown earlier. But the best was when some AEO in the Canberra read out either 'Quest' or the raunchy readers' letters printed in Mayfair...:ok: Everyone stopped what they were doing and listened in!

However, too much Canberra RT transmitting once allowed me to DF a pair of Canberras whilst bumbling around an AAR towline in the mighty Vicekrs FunBus. Watching the rate of bearing movement, it was obvious that they were close, so we turned and attempted to triangulate them from the other end of the towline. We spotted them, gave chase and fired off a yellow flare, claiming a 'Fox 4' and requesting 'kill removal'.

With experience, it was obvious when the RT spoofing was coming from a Canberra; anyone who'd ever flown a Hunter could recognise the sound of an Avon engine's generators.

Shooting at the flag towed by Tatty Ton's jets during Akronelli APCs was the sport of kings though. My best score was 52% with 'lucky' red tipped bullets. But on another occasion I had a runaway gun and my entire ammo load went in one pass until the blank spacer round stopped it. The pilot of the other F-4 said that the shimmer of brass ejected by my SUU 23 was very impressive. You were supposed to reach down and turn off the Centre Station Selector if you had a runaway gun; however, by the time you realised what was happening, pointed in a safe direction and reached for the selector, the gun would invariably have fired out.

There are plenty of Akrotiri stories out there; few are printable! Such as 'Skipper' and the 'Whale'?? :E

Fun times and good banter back then.

[BBadanov]

I once flew two sorties on a Baltic range for a German Geppard. The Rushtons were destroyed within a second or so of being acquired.


When I did TLP at Jever in early '80s, the Germans provided a demo and hands-on of the Gepard. It looked a very impressive system. Like the 23-4, I am glad I never flew against it.

[Halton Brat]

I seem to recall reading in 'Air Clues' (many moons ago, in fact it was etched on a slate methinks), an account of an incident involving a Canberra which developed an Aileron restriction in flight, following an application of bank at low level.

The aircraft was continually rolling, but by a skillful combination of pushing/pulling, the pilot was able to initiate a climb to an altitude sufficient for abandonment - I think at least one crew member had to hop out of the door with his 'chute when the green/blue orientation was at its' optimum. Anybody else recall?

HB

[dalek]

Beagle

Your 52% must be close to the record. We quite often came back with a clean banner after (up to) eight Lightnings.
Do remember an American exchange Officer (Binbrook 1973?) once scoring 56%, but he was the exception, not the rule.

[BEagle]

dalek, having checked my logbook, it seems that it wasn't 52%, it was only 50.1% in XV399 on 16 Aug 1982. The runaway gun was on my second sortie that day, but in XV437. I did have a celebratory pint of G&T afterwards though, as the 50.1% shoot had completed my 'ACE' qualification. That's ACE as in Allied Commander Europe or somesuch, not 'ace'!

The 52% was actually later in the year on 17 December during a strafe sortie - again in XV399. Something which had been added to our repertoire due to OP CORPORATE. Great trip with the late Griggles in the back - off at high speed to the range as time was tight, a quick dry pass then several hot passes. From the range we flew down to the corner of East Anglia to act as a Tac Check bounce - which worked superbly as we caught the pilot being checked in the middle of a frequency change from Eastern Radar to Neatishead (which was what I'd expected). He couldn't call the threat to the rest of the formation as they were all faffing about looking up the fighter stud frequency and was exercise shot down with an AIM-9 as a result. Then back to Wattisham to land after the best 65 minutes of flying I ever had in the F-4! Particularly as I'd managed to 'shoot down' my Flt Cdr on his Tac Check - which Griggles thoroughly enjoyed!

The north coast of East Anglia was always a good hunting ground to pounce on unsuspecting Canberras. Obtain an easy kill and film it for Taceval, then have fun. Although the time I was on QRA and had a practice scramble on 9 Mar 1983 was less easy - the first target was a Canberra PR9 (some trials thing with an odd-looking nose). A PR9 flying tight turns is not an easy target for a Q-fit F-4, particularly when heavy! The task was to intercept, identify and report, then shadow. However, as the PR9 wouldn't co-operate, the task changed to 'exercise engage'..... The second target, a TT18, was a little easier though.

EX PROFIT could be interesting at night if the target was mis-id'd. Many an unsuspecting airliner became the focus of attention, particularly the 'Norwich Flyer' - AirUK's F-27 service to Norwich Airport. Ironically, once after a Leuchars JMC when my nav and I had to fly back from Edinburgh to Norwich via Leeds Bradford in the AirUK F-27, we couldn't get in to Leeds Bradford on the way due to low cloud, so had to divert to East Midlands to let out the LBA passengers. Whilst waiting for the aircraft to start up again, we noticed that the stewardesses looked rather happy, so asked why. "We'll be back after (2300?) now, so we'll get a minimum overtime payment", one of them told us. "Oh good - so that'll be 2 large gin and tonics, please", we replied. Which, all credit to her, she brought us. But we were off the normal timetable by the time we'd wandered southwards in the mighty Fokker - and found ourselves being intercepted by a pair of F-4s from our own squadron who were on a night EX PROFIT trip! We told our friendly stewardess that it was our 'welcome home' reception!

[exMudmover]

BBadanov

In the Falklands we were up against 35mm twin Oerlikons – same gun as Gepard, different mount. I was nearly shot down twice by this system at low level and you’re right – they don’t half get your attention!

[Fareastdriver]

In early 1971 they wre shutting down FEAF. To this end the Marine Section was shuttling to the China Rock range with loads of ammuntion, tools etc and dumping it at sea. Then the Marine Section folded and there was a problem if getting rid of all this ammunition. A truckload of it arrived at the Squadron and we were told to fire it off from our Whirlwind 10s and dump what was left over. A Whirlwind had two GMPG mounts but but for this we only used the one at the main door and to give something to aim at we took the now redundant SAR dummy and let him sunbathe on the rock.

It took all day. We had three aircraft shuttling and every body was having a go. The crewmen, the squadron's regiment, ground crew, our clerk and all the squadron pilots. We had two spare barrels in each aircraft because after a couple of boxes the airstream on one side of the barrel causes it to bend so it has to come off to cool down.

Sighting was easy; it was 2/1 ball/tracer and you could work onto the rock using the splashes in the sea. It was a great day that used loads of HM's money and at the end the day the dummy was recovered and brought back to Changi.

There were two holes in him; one probably a ricochet.

[dalek]

A lot of 7 Sqn Rushton sorties were out of Kinloss to the Benbecula range.
For a while we used a device called RAMDI. Radioactive Miss Distance Indicator. A small geiger counter placed in the body of the Rushton which could pass information down the cable to the Canberra crew.
A small radioactive particle was placed in the nose of the Rapier. If it passed close to the Rushton we obtained a readout of distance.
I wonder just how "trace" that particle was if it could be detected at 20ft whistling past at 600kts.

[charliegolf]

Drift:

There is a story about (Paddy someone, crewman Ldr?) a 33Sqn officer who was so confident that the crewmen were total crap at A to G, that he put his SD hat on the target at the range. Not a scratch, apparently.

Someone will have the details I'm sure.

CG

[Fareastdriver]

Paddy someone, crewman Ldr?)
It would be just like him to do that. I believe that after we left the other squadron fired off loads of ammo, then threw the rest in followed by the guns.

Enough thread drift; back to the Cranberries.

[nazca_steve]

Gents, I am staggered, but very happy at this flurry of activity. Usually there are only one or two replies, but this bevvy of stories has had me grinning all evening here. :ok:

Lots to work through here, but a few things spring out and some PMs maybe coming your collective ways as a result. Everyone else, perhaps too many priceless gems in there to call individually, but cheers all for sharing them. A few others though I have to mention:

Halton Brat:

The story you referred to in Air Clues sounds suspiciously like the one the late Les Bywaters of 3 Sqn told me about Flt. Lt. Ron Ledwidge (if I recall his surname correctly). The incident he related was that Ron's B(I).8 indeed had a stuck aileron and matches yours perfectly, down to the nav bailing out after timing the orientation just right. Not easy I would imagine from the prone position in the Can nose cone.

Beagle:

You wrote: "the first target was a Canberra PR9 (some trials thing with an odd-looking nose)." My suspicion is this was almost certainly XH132, the Shorts modified SC.9. This was the only Cran PR.9 with a nose job. Went through several paint schemes over the years - do you happen to remember what it wore for this incident? Pretty cool that it gave a good account of itself. Did the TT.18 actually put up a fight despite being easier? Being from East Anglia (next door to Wyton), hearing about doing QRA intercepts on these Cans is of interest to me. Can you describe how you typically approached them and what action they typically took if they saw you?

Dalek:
You say you were on 85 Sqn in the early 70s- did you ever fly the T.11 or 19 during that period?

ExMudmover:

Are you referring to the runs performed at Goose Green? If so I am assuming you were on GR.3s - again, if so, did you know Jeff Glover by chance?

BBadanov:

Sorry, yes, I grew up reading too many war comics and even in my mind as 32 year old I imagine that banner towing was adventerous! As you are all rapidly pointing out to me it seems it was a little more sedate than that.;)

[500N]

Question re the exact location of the Bombing range on the Wash / East Anglia.

I used to spend a fair bit of time on the Wash (bird catching)
and used to sit on the sea wall and watch some of the jets doing
what they did - late 60's and throughout the 70's.

I can't remember exactly where it was so if anyone could remind me,
this would be good.

Also, did any mishaps occur (bird strikes) with the huge flocks of birds / waders that used to fly around their ?

Thanks.

[nazca_steve]

Possibly Holbeach Bombing Range:

RAF Holbeach - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Holbeach)

I am sure someone will confirm though. The wildlife aspect is mentioned here so seems a good match:

RAF Marham - RAF Holbeach Bombing Range (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafmarham/aboutus/holbeach.cfm)

[500N]

Thanks. Holbeach sounds right as that was one of the places we went.


I like the warning at the bottom of the RAF Web page.
Used to find (or see) a fair bit of stuff way out on the Marsh
as that was where we were mainly catching the birds.
.

[spectre150]

Nazca, drifting a bit from your earlier question regarding target tug and AI training tasks, but possibly of interest to you are some of the other roles that 100 Sqn RAF (aka Tatty Ton) undertook in the early 1980s. Its primary task, at least in terms of programming priority and time spent airborne, was performing practice interceptions (PIs) for the School of Fighter Control at West Drayton. These PIs were mind numbingly dull - 2 Canberras were launched to act as a target and 'fighter' for the trainee FCs. I think we were contracted to provide an hour and a half on task, usually in the upper 30s/low 40s flight levels with a half hour transit each way. Two of these sorties a day was not uncommon. An earlier poster has already bemoaned the appalling air conditioning in the 'berra - we had heated electric socks to try and keep the frostbite at bay. We (well the navs certainly, not sure about the nose gunners) got a good soaking in the descent as the ice inside the cockpit melted. I have said previously that banner towing was dull, but it didnt come close to the boredom of these PI sorties.

A much more interesting task was acting as targets for the Bloodhound SAM sites around the UK. This was our one chance to do some low level flying. A significant part of the sqn was young pilots and navs who had not quite made the fast jet slots through training and needed some flying hours, airmanship and experience before stepping up to fast jets for their second tours. Fat dumb and happy in a large slow jet, with no RWR, we happily tooled around the Bloodhound sites having a bit of fun.

[nazca_steve]

Spectre150, this is exactly the kind of stuff I am interested in. Please let me know if I have not sent a PM yet to you. Feel free to drift around topics as much as you want. 100 Sqn is always of interest to me - those filthy stripey things will always have a special place in my childhood memories!

The defrosting ice decent comment is priceless...lack of most mod cons seems blindingly apparent in the Canberra. Perhaps another of its endearing factors to the armchair enthusiast like me, but not to those who lived it!

You say no RWR - I thought most Cans from the Mk.8 onwards had Orange Putter? Oh wait, that was active radar, right? I always get muddled with radar types, bear with me...

[BBadanov]

500N "Thanks. Holbeach sounds right as that was one of the places we went."

Mate, it's been a few years but I thought the most southern range and closest to the wash was Wainfleet. Then Holbeach was north, and Donna Nook further north again. I may have these last two ass about.

No doubt QWI extrordinaire, Foldie, will pull his range map out of his hip pocket and correct me! :ugh:

Steve: "You say no RWR - I thought most Cans from the Mk.8 onwards had Orange Putter? Oh wait, that was active radar..."

I never had anything to do with the Canberry in the RAF, but my guess would be that the only one that had an RWR was the PR.9. I stand corrected, but it was probably an ARI 18228 (or some such number?).

[options770]

One function we had on 7 Sqn which was a lot of fun was providing training for Forward Air Controllers at Templeton Airfield in South Wales. This involved flying what was known as the Templeton GAP (Ground Attack Profile) which was a cloverleaf pattern of airfield attacks usually flown as a battle pair.

As I remember the four legs were: From the North at 250ft 360 knots low level straight in lay down bombing followed by a pull up to 4000ft and a tear drop turn to run in from the West for a dive bomb run bottoming out at 250ft for a low level run out to the east, a low level turn in on an offset to pull up for a tip in dive attack which was repeated with a run from the south.
At this point, the no 2 aircraft would take the lead and we would go round again.
Great fun and usually flown on Thursday and Friday when the Navy didn't need us at Plymouth.
These manoeuvres formed the basis for the attack profiles used during the St Mawgan Air Shows.

Had a look in the log book I have with me and note that we also did a similar profile on the Larkhill ranges.

[dalek]

NS
Quite a few T19 sorties. B2 with pointed concreted nose and no tip tanks.
No navaids either other than TACAN.
We tended to use the T19 for PI's and any sortie that required climb above 410. Pressurisation limitations limited ceiling to 470 but with a light aircraft we once took one to 520. We still had a reasonable rate of climb but MCrit and safety speed considerations made us chicken out.
Never heard of a T11

[spectre150]

Steve, the period I am talking about (early 1980s) was towards the end of the Canberra's long career. With the demise of 13 Sqn in the recce role around that time that just left one operational mark in the RAF - the PR9 flown by 39 Sqn. 100 Sqn was a targets facilities unit and having no operational role did not require operational role equipment such as RWRs. We did hope that something would be fitted if we ever had to carry out our war role of LOPRO (I think this was covered elsewhere in this thread) although it was generally accepted that without the performance and manoeuverabilty to evade Soviet maritime defenc,s the RWRs of the day would not have provided much more than an warning of imminent disaster!

I have no idea what an Orange Putter is. The B(I)8 was long out of RAF Service by the time I joined the Force (my father was a B(I)8 nav in Germany when I was born). Later marks were not necessarily more 'operational' in the sense that they had more modern equipment (your comment suggests this might be your thinking). The TT18, for example was a re-worked B2 fitted for the Rushton target towing role. The E15 (a modified B15 variant) had the bigger Avon engines whereas the TT18 had the smaller donks fitted to the B2/T4 family. On 100 Sqn in my time we operated a mixed fleet of B2, T4, PR7, E15 and TT18s - the monthly log book summary was always a bit of a chore!

[BEagle]

You wrote: "the first target was a Canberra PR9 (some trials thing with an odd-looking nose)." My suspicion is this was almost certainly XH132, the Shorts modified SC.9. This was the only Cran PR.9 with a nose job. Went through several paint schemes over the years - do you happen to remember what it wore for this incident? Pretty cool that it gave a good account of itself. Did the TT.18 actually put up a fight despite being easier? Being from East Anglia (next door to Wyton), hearing about doing QRA intercepts on these Cans is of interest to me. Can you describe how you typically approached them and what action they typically took if they saw you?



Yes, it was the SC9, probably on the way back to RAE Bedford. It was in raspberry ripple clours, if I recall correctly. I think it ended its days at RAF St Mawgan as I saw it there during a UAS Summer Camp in about 1992 looking rather forlorn in faded hemp and grey. I can't remember whether it was still intact, but the nose section certainly was.

A practice QRA intercept was unlikely to include any evasion - the targets did not normally respond. All the practice was intended for was to exercise the system, so we were usually tasked just to 'intercept, identify and report' - even an exercise engagement with 8 live missiles on board posed a degree of risk. So usually it was just a simple intercept, before closing to loose echelon.

[rlsbutler]

Spectre #94

Orange Putter was a little active radar, of 1950's vintage I guess, to be found in the tails of PR 7 and B15 (and no doubt other operational) Canberras of my time - FEAF 1962-4. It gave a coarse quadrant display of a threat from behind to the nav plotter. I never knowingly saw the display myself. It gave too many spurious warnings so it would have been a worrying nuisance on an operational sortie (you hoped); of course you would only switch it on briefly for fear of actually attracting trouble.

If however you had a high level night exercise with the promise of an interception, it was then useful to time the start of your version of the Lancaster corkscrew. You might never see the Sea Vixen or Javelin concerned (which you could usually by day), but I remember no post-flight crowing about being "splashed" so it presumably worked.

[Tinribs]

If the topic is to drift a bit then someone has to mention the Prussian Queen event

You talk about interesting pilot/nav miss communications

A 100 sqn Nav Laurie Davies, later died in a PR9 crash at Wyton, had a favourite trick when airbporne with a new pilot. He would disconnect from RT and pass the cockpit on his way to the nose bombing area waving a large screwdriver. Over the next few minutes important looking electric thingies would be thrown backward into the cockpit area. Laurie would then reappear saying " OK clever dick lets see you cope with that", the bits had of course come aboard in his navbag and were nothing to do with the aircraft being flown. After landing the pilot would then find his flying boot laces had been tied to the rudder pedals

[diginagain]

A much more interesting task was acting as targets for the Bloodhound SAM sites around the UK. This was our one chance to do some low level flying. A significant part of the sqn was young pilots and navs who had not quite made the fast jet slots through training and needed some flying hours, airmanship and experience before stepping up to fast jets for their second tours. Fat dumb and happy in a large slow jet, with no RWR, we happily tooled around the Bloodhound sites having a bit of fun.Certainly brightened-up a summer camp at West Raynham for this cadet when, out on a forced-march around the local area, a Canberra appeared from behind a row of trees.

[longer ron]

I know what you mean...whilst at Brawdy in the late 70's and while picking up a brand new Triumph Tiger 750 from Llawhaden (sp?) a canberra appeared at extreme low level - contour hugging through the valley...lovely sight !

[spectre150]

rlsbutler - thanks for that info. I am still a little confused - you describe OP as an active radar but also make it sound like an RWR (ie a receiver) when you say 'It gave a coarse quadrant display of a threat'. I could understand if the bombers were fitted with rudimentary RWRs to pick up AI radar equipped fighters (Jav/vixen in your time?) but not an active sensor. Can anyone enlighten me further?

[Fareastdriver]

The Orange Putter they had on the Valiant was a baby radar. It had a small screen in front of the captain that indicated where a trailing aircraft was. Taken out of bombers to stop missiles homing on to it, too long minimum range for tankers, so ditched.

[NRU74]

The Orange Putter they had on the ValiantI remember we checked it was working by firing a Very cartridge filled with chaff, also when the interceptor reached,I think, one mile the blip on the screen sprouted 'wings'.

[Fareastdriver]

This is what Orange Putter looked like in a Valiant. Item No 10.


http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee224/fareastdriver/Valiantcockpit.jpg

It's a pre 1963 picture; it has a single needle A.S.I..

[nazca_steve]

From the Indian Air Force web site: The English Electric Canberra in Indian Air Force Service - Anandeep S Pannu [www.bharat-rakshak.com] (http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/History/Aircraft/Canberra/Canberra03.html)

This confirms the spurious warnings nature rlsbutler discussed. As others have pointed out, nice idea but had the drawback like any active radar of attracting attention. The site reads:

“Orange Putter” – was tail warning radar on the PR.7...Basically “Orange Putter” was radar that projected its beam backward from the Canberra, so if an enemy aircraft attempted to sneak up behind it to shoot it down, the radar could warn the crew about it. Unfortunately it wasn’t always reliable, and often gave spurious warnings. This had the effect of raising blood pressures of the aircrew – and at least one vital photo reconnaissance mission was called off because of spurious “Orange Putter” warnings. These spurious warnings resulted in an erroneous intelligence estimate of an enemy fighter force existing where there was none, during the 1961 Goa operations! Another Canberra sortie had verified that there were in fact no fighters anywhere to be seen!

The other drawback of “Orange Putter” was that it was an active system, i.e. it radiated radar energy. As many a Mosquito night fighter and intruder crew found to their misfortune in WWII, this lead properly equipped enemy fighters to them like moths to a flame. "

I will see if I can dig this up in the B(I).12 APs I have, but I am sure OP was not just on the PR Cans, but the interdictors as well. May have even been on some of the earlier variants but pulled out later on when realised to be obsolete. Spectre150's comments defininitely imply that this kit was long gone by the final days of the Can.

Whatever the case I feel it was a nice idea at least to give the poor old '40s era Can a chance of picking up someone sneaking up on it. I wonder if for some reason it was not on the 13 Sqn PR.7 that was shot down in Suez, as they were using a rear facing periscope to spot for bandits.

[nazca_steve]

"Yes, it was the SC9, probably on the way back to RAE Bedford. It was in raspberry ripple clours, if I recall correctly. I think it ended its days at RAF St Mawgan as I saw it there during a UAS Summer Camp in about 1992 looking rather forlorn in faded hemp and grey. I can't remember whether it was still intact, but the nose section certainly was."

Thanks for this clarification, Beagle, I know the raspberry ripple scheme, indeed it was one of my favourites - too bad she did not stay in this scheme and went plain old hemp/grey. The nose was apparently saved by an Italian collector and ended up out there as far as we know.

CANBERRA - PR.9 (SHORTS SC.9)- XH132 (http://www.bywat.co.uk/xh132.html)

[nazca_steve]

Dalek, you wrote earlier:

"Quite a few T19 sorties. B2 with pointed concreted nose and no tip tanks.
No navaids either other than TACAN.
We tended to use the T19 for PI's and any sortie that required climb above 410. Pressurisation limitations limited ceiling to 470 but with a light aircraft we once took one to 520. We still had a reasonable rate of climb but MCrit and safety speed considerations made us chicken out.
Never heard of a T11 "

Having TACAN at least was an advance over the early B.2s and other variants...off the top of my head I think these may have only have had ADF at the time. With TACAN fitted did you bother with ADF at all or just go with the former nav aid?

Ref the T.11, this was the former version of the T.19, except it has the AI radar in the nose cone and not the concrete version! I believe this was a variant design to train Javelin crews in AI, later on when this was no longer needed the redundant T.11s had the radar removed and became your variant. I asked Options770 in an email if he remembered if the gun sights were still fitted in the 19 or not...do you remember by chance?

[BBadanov]

Having TACAN at least was an advance over the early B.2s and other variants...off the top of my head I think these may have only have had ADF at the time.

It was the same-same but different with the B.20. :hmm:

When it was announced in late 1966 that 2SQN would deploy from Butterworth (Malaysia) to Phan Rang (South Vietnam) several mods had to be undertaken. TACAN had to be fitted, as all navigation in SVN to R/Vs was to a TACAN point. UHF was added to the VHF, as UHF was the tacair freq band (choppers and FACs also, of course, had FM). Armour plate was added under the pilot's bangseat and under the nav's prone bombaimer position. Also nitrogen purging was added to the fuel system to prevent tank fires if hit by groundfire.

ADF was retained, and later replaced in an early 1970s navcom upgrade. At that stage, there were many more NDBs in Aust than TACANs and VORs.

The other navaid was Green Satin doppler with a GPI (mk IV I think).

[dalek]

I arrived on 85 in 1972. I don't think there were any gunsights by then.

[BSweeper]

The T19s that I flew in 1975-78 certainly did not have a gunsight.

However, they were incredibly fuel efficient. On internals (3 main tanks) plus bomb bay tank (no tip or wing tanks; 13,500 lbs total I think), they could get from St Mawgan down to Gibraltar and land with the same fuel as a TT18 with tips (18,000 lbs). They could also cruise climb to well over 52K. IIRC, range descents were about 110nm from TOD.

[nazca_steve]

Thanks for confirming it. It is highly likely the gun sights were removed full stop from the T.19 - I will see if I can get hold of the Pilot's Notes for it and see. Makes sense though without the AI radar still fitted.

Also good to know the 19 was so fuel efficient. Does anyone recall what the cruise speed was for say the B.2 and B.6 (as representative of the first and second gen Avons)?

[BBadanov]

M 0.74 :ok:

[nazca_steve]

You're going to make me convert that into kts aren't you? ;)

And also...first batch B.20s or the 7,500 RPM ones? Or was it the same on both?

[BBadanov]

Same on both: A84-201 to A84-227 "Mk 1" Avon 6500 lb, and A84-228 to A84-248 Mk 109 Avon 7500 lb.

Frankly I can't remember now what 0.74 would give you at altitude (above 40k ft), about 450KTAS I think, maybe a tad less? :confused:

[BEagle]

M0.74 / FL 400 ~ FL 500:

ISA-15 = 409 KTAS
ISA = 424 KTAS
ISA+15 = 439 KTAS


(Why does this stupid editing system keep changing upper case to lower case.....:mad:)

[pr00ne]

What makes anyone imagine that the T19 ever had gun sights fitted in the first place?
As they were converted from the B2 to the T11 by sticking a Javelin radar in the nose, Javelin navigators for the use of, and then converted to the T19 by taking it out again, where does a gun sight come in?

[dalek]

BSweeper is right about the fuel efficiency. Some of our older and dumber (pilot) Flight Commanders could just not understand it.
We once flew a "raid" from Norway requiring an attack on Bawdsey? at 470.
Weather conditions were marginal so the 100 Sqn authoriser insisted on giving his crew a B2 with Tips and Belly 16,800lbs, for max diversion fuel.
Our 85 Sqn crew left in a T19 with 11,000lbs.
We shot straight up to 470. The B2 struggled.
We arrrived back at Trondheim with 800lbs more fuel.
Dumb ba***ard did exactly the same the following day.

[rlsbutler]

BSweeper

Without being picky, may I say your T19 was not “incredibly” fuel efficient but predictably so ?

Compared to your airframe with no operational stores to carry, our B2s and B15s during my time in Singapore never (I think) surrendered the bomb bay to a fuel tank. We always flew high level with tip tanks, presumably because operationally we would have dropped them, and had almost no real range benefit from their extra fuel.

My longest trip was the initial ferry of one of 45 Sqn’s new B15s (with tip tanks) from New Delhi to Tengah. I was supposed to stage through Rangoon. I was a bit of a graphs-anorak and knew what line to track, so by the time we were due to let down for Rangoon we had told FEAF we were keeping going. I did not ask and no one complained. There were no competent air traffic authorities, so we cruise-climbed from the beginning. Those were the days !

BEagle (at #114) will have had a typo – his first line should probably have read ISA-15 = 409 ktas. We in the tropic zone would have been cruising at ISA-5 or so. The trip was 5:30 hrs and the route was IIRC 2300nm.

We flew our B2s back to UK to collect the B15s. Presumably we could all have taken a bomb bay tank each way instead of the tips. I expect the FEAF staff sent us along their established chain of way-stations and reasoned that these would have to be kept alive for diversion even if we could plan to overfly them. For my crew, the killer might have been FEAF’s difficulty in getting the MU at Wroughton to change the tank over just before Christmas 1962.

By top of descent for Tengah we had reached FL 520, which we (and you no doubt) knew to be 2000 feet beyond official safety in the case of pressurisation failure. How much higher would this cocky young pilot (White rating, 36 hours on type) have gone if he had not had the drag of the tip tanks ? Who knows !

[redsetter]

pr00ne,

yes, there was no reason for the T.19 to have gunsights. The T.11 originally had radar "collimator" sights for pilot and pupil. I assume they would have been removed at the same time as the radar.

rs

[Tinribs]

I flew T19s at West Raynahm, 85 then 100. the aircraft did not have gunsights but on enquiring what the marks left by removing some coaming bits were I was told the previous mark 11s had one.

The aircraft were used for training Javelin navs and so that a visual cue could be matched to a radar picture gunsights were fitted. I was a bit sceptical about that story as I could not see how the nav in the back of the 11 could see a gunsight.

I spose it would have been possible for the trainee to vacate ejection seat and sit on jump seat for training purposes at hight level but it all seemed a bit far fetched.

Maybe the present question is a throwback to that orriginal story or maybe it was true. Find a mark 11 flyer

We were told the T19 could not have tip tanks because of the tip mounted pioto probe but the T17 did so all the suppoosed facts are a bit suspect. Certainly the T19 had speeds increased by 5kts because of different position of pitot

[redsetter]

Tinribs,

as I understand it the T.11 carried two student radar/navigators. The one waiting his turn sat on the occasional seat by the pilot and watched the interception through the duplicate pilot's sight; the student in the back had the full radar scope, as per Javelin navigator.

rs

[Wander00]

Talking about "5kts extra", when I joined 360, before the T17s arrived , we had a motley collection of T4s. B2s and an odd B6 (which I nearly got airborne in but SLOPS stopped me because I had to have flown CT in it before I could fly as a "target"). One of the B2s, WD 935, had been some sort of trials airframe which was about 2,500 lbs heavier than a "standard" B2. Hence if you hit the runway hard, you realised you had forgotten the 5kts extra for the heavier airframe. That aircraft had remained in Bomber Command black and grey. A Naval crew took it away for the weekend to Germany, and got arrested by the plods for having "stolen" it. I flew it to Woughton on is last flight, and it ended up in the Wales Aircraft Museum, but was I believe broken up when the museum folded. I think the nose may still be around.

[nazca_steve]

Redsetter, Tinribs, thanks for the details on sight usage. PR00ne, the only reason I inquired about the T.19 having them was to see if they were possibly leftover from the T.11 days. As it has now been made clear, they were indeed removed.

WD935 sounds interesting. Les Bywater's old site has this to say on it:

CANBERRA - B.2 - WD935 (http://www.bywat.co.uk/wd935.html)

Shows it was involved in the Red Dean trials which might account for that extra weight. Also a shot of it in the old Bomber Command scheme you mentioned.

[Wander00]

NS - interesting, thanks. I had always understood that the delivery to Wroughton was to have been WD935's last flight, but obviously not. Another domestic myth banished.

[nazca_steve]

Looks like she was fairly hard to kill off and still had useful work to do. Interesting to see her painted up in that fake Suez scheme, very fetching although did not last as we can see. At least nice to know her nose cone still exists.

[redsetter]

I think Wander00 is right and the website is wrong. WD935 went to to 15 MU in Sep 67 and then straight from there to St Athan in Nov 71 (presumably by road). So the delivery to Wroughton was the last flight.

[mike rondot]

Anybody out there who flew the B(I)8 with 3 Sqn?

[H Peacock]

Anybody out there who flew the B(I)8 with 3 Sqn?

I beleive my old UAS instructor Rod Newman (Ex-MASUAS) was an RAFG Canberra man and was possibly on 3 Sqn.

[sharpend]

Hi Guys, well you know I flew B(I)8s with 14 Sqn.... a far superior outfit to those up the road :ok:

Think Tag Taggart was on 3 Sqn B(I)8s

[mike rondot]

Thanks sharpened. Request is to help the respected writer Denis Calvert with a piece on 3 Sqn B(I)8s for an aviation mag. He says he needs 100 words but I would have thought anyone with a few strafe and bombing sorties behind them would find it difficult to restrict any description to 100 words. Maybe he meant 1000 words, I'll check. In the meantime I'll try to contact Tag.

Mike R

[bob shayler]

I served at Benbecula from 1981 - 83 and remember the Canberra Target Tugs well. One helped us out when we were flying back from St. Kilda in a Wessex and one of the crew informed us we were lost and the Canberra was guiding us in. Not too sure whether they were winding us up but good fun all the same,
Regards,
Bob

[tommee_hawk]

I was a Nav on 360 between 1984-1986. Safety speed on a T4 was 140kt, T17 was 150kt. EFATO was 10 degrees towards the live engine after reducing power to avoid uncontrollable roll. Never forget B Cornes saying "Oh, f*ck" at 130kt during departure - after some 1980's CRM, it was established that Gringo's comment was due to leaving his sortie charts in Sqn, not an Imminent T17 disaster!

Icing letdown was carried out with 6000rpm+/-50 from entering the icing layer until assured of touchdown(flaps etc, no bomb doors on T17, and cleared to land at start of procedure) - except for Ken Robson at Bodo who was cleared for an icing approach, broke cloud at 600ft to see a civ jet lined up for departure). Ken executed a (very careful) missed approach to join a low-level circuit to land.

I recall during IRT that the "pilot student" had to slow down, single-engine, to establish max asymmetric control speed (individual to each driver, but still scary down the back). This established the strength of the driver's leg to hold the rudder.

Can any former Canberra chums tell me what happened to Lt Cdr Ken Lamprey, Sqn Ldr John Ritchie, Sqn Ldr Bill Purchase (T17 legend), Dave H-E, or any other 360 Sqn/ 231 OCU staff between 1983 - 1986, I'd love to hear it.

I remember arriving on 360 Sqn and asking about leave to sort out my quarter to be told by Andy Anderson that two things didn't exist on 360 - "lunch and a leave pass". Then he laid back, in his flying suit and slippers(!) and went back to sleep....... Simon Blake ended up as OC Scampton, but Gp Capt Blake still owes me £20 000 after a "slightly tired" snooker game during the Leuchars Air Show in 1986, I think. Still have the cheque somewhere..... :D

[retrosgone]

Hi Tommee - I was on 360 from 1980 to end of '84. Might be able to fill in some of the details!

PM me - cheers

[Wander00]

Don't remember doing crit speds on IRT - did them with my Bassingbourn instructor on the Bedford Levels at 200'

[chopd95]

Please see PM

[Tinribs]

We used to do ours on that nice straight bit of road between Spawn and Balding

[FJJP]

tommee_hawk see yr pms

[clicker]

Only just found this thread, very interesting.

Re the concrete filled noses. I recall as a civvie instructor with the ATC of being on an annual camp at West Raynham in 1976 when I overheard a short conversation between a nav and a cadet who was known for his single cell brain.

"Mister, whats that funny shaped nose for" pointing to a TT19.

"Its fitted with Blue Circle"

"Cor, whats that"

"Can't say without shooting you afterwards" (At this point we hoped he would)

Net result was the cadet always thought he had seen a top secret aircraft.

[atcbird]

For some great Canberra stories I can strongly recommend www.wingedwarriors.co.uk (http://www.wingedwarriors.co.uk)

[nazca_steve]

Clicker,

good story, I take it you're referring to the Blue Circle cement joke that was the ballast in the T.19 nose cone. Hey, at least the cadet came out of it chuffed, quite ironic really considering the T.19 was nothing more than a B.2 with a pointy nose!

[skua]

Can anyone corroborate the following story which I remember my UAS QFI relating? His previous tour had been on Canberras at Laarbruch. One winter the RAFG ski champs were at Garmisch. On the opening morning the officer i/c the championships was on a chairlift escorting the AOC RAFG to the top of the mountain for some opening ceremony.

Suddenly there was a roar from behind them. One of my QFI's mates had taken it upon himself to open the championships in some style and was flying up the piste, below the level of the top of the pylons. Don't believe he was drawing flying pay for much longer after that....

[sharpend]

That chap was Johnny Wilson. He got Court Marshalled. His sentence was a mega rep from the CinC. The day dawned rather cloudy, typical winter on the North German Plain. We were all in the crew room on 14 Sqn playing Uckers. Johnny's b*llocking was at 10:30. At 13:00 he wandered in with the typical 'I could not care less' look on his face. 'How did it go Johnny?' we asked. His smile disappeared and all he said was ' Oh f**k'.

Last heard working for M&S.

[sharpend]

ps, he flew under a few bridges on the Rhine on his way back to Wildenrath. Interesting thing was he actually entered into the auth sheets the phrase 'Beat up skiers on ski slopes.

This is all true!

[Rich_Slater]

Hi all,

We are currently working on a Canberra aircraft for Microsoft's Flight Simulator X. Are there any ex-Canberra pilots here that would be willing to share their knowledge and experience of the Canberra with us?

Many thanks in advance,

Richard

[nazca_steve]

Hi Rich,

I made a huge range of Canberras for FS2004; I'm no real-world pilot but if I can help in any way, give me a shout.

Flying Stations: Payware and Freeware aircraft and scenery for FSX and FS9/FS2004 (http://www.flyingstations.com)

Steve

[options770]

I did a few years flying the Canberra but it does seem a long time ago. If I can be of assistance please let me know

Joe

[rlsbutler]

@rich slater

My experience of the Canberra ended in 1978, so I will not be able to produce answers for you. Most of us may be in the same boat. May I however remind you of interesting features that will distinguish your Canberra simulation from that of (say) a Hunter.

I assume that you will be modelling those marks (the B2, the T4 and the B15 that I flew, among others) with a dome canopy. How to give the client pilot the distorted reference given by the curved dashboard and by the optics that varied as you moved your head ?

Are you going to simulate the runway approach when the entire canopy is frosted up and when you can just see enough by peeking through the Clear Vision porthole ?

Will you convey a sense of the unergonomic layout of the cockpit instruments and controls, oblige the client pilot to manage the fuel correctly and give him only a second or two to find the Stores Jettison button before it is too late ?

Do not forget the engine management, particularly the RPM bracket within which the swirl vanes move (5800-6200 ? - mentioned a lot when Icing procedure was discussed earlier in the thread) and the RPM where the bleed valves shut (or embarassingly do not) as the engines accelerate. You will need to build in that charming throbbing sensation by which the offending engine signals that it is no longer at your service.

You might give your client pilot the thrill of a LABS weapon delivery - the half-loop, the roll-off-the-top and the escape dive done entirely on the finely calibrated artificial horizon. In reality it was most satisfying at night, but perhaps you will want to simulate the gyrating landscape.

You know about (and cannot properly simulate) the knee-trembling of asymmetric flight. If you have simulated the Meteor already, you have faced up to the problem in its extreme case. You have the chance to simulate the extreme gyrations that arise when the pilot loses control. All Canberra pilots know what these might be, but maybe all who can describe them at first hand will have to use the Ouija board to do so.

[Rich_Slater]

Hi chaps,

Thanks so far for the replies.

Joe, if you're able to spare some time to answer a few emails for me on some of the general characteristics of flying the Canberra then I'd be very grateful. I'll drop you a message once I get to the bits I need to run past an actual pilot.

@rlsbutler Great post! :O
We will be doing the PR9 model. We had a day down at Kemble looking over and photographing the bird they are getting ready to fly again down there (if anyone would like some of the hundreds of pictures I took of the aircraft down there then feel free to get in touch).
I love the comment about asymmetric flight - a perfect example of how working purely from the official pilot's notes can be foolhardy. According to the official write up the aircraft should handle perfectly fine when flying on one engine. Reports from the pilots that did make it home speak of terror and not being able to walk for a week due to the effort required to hold the aircraft straight using the rudder.

[rlsbutler]

@rich slater

The official write-up was right virtually all of the time (as ever).

I made Her Majesty pay heavily to plant the lessons of asymmetric flight in my poor brain - you can read the gist in another post elsewhere in PPRuNe and not find it very instructive. Through the years I gave myself a lot of asymmetric experience specifically to make sure that I could deal with a real problem. Single-engine cruise, flame-outs in Cu-Nims, N∕√T airtests, at least one real engine-ruined landing (there you are – I have might have had more that I do not now remember) – all no problem, but with just a frisson of excitement. We the unsung majority really understood the forces involved and we were able to depend on the good old Avon relighting on request.

The first rule was to keep the speed up. You did not need a second rule, but that might have been to Trim. In the worst case – heavy take-off from a short runway, where you will not stop inside the airfield and you might not fly away – you have two options: either (1) give up and shut the live engine or (2) lower the nose (for speed) and trim (reducing power on the live engine if you cannot hold the yaw otherwise).

Asymmetric approaches were properly covered by your official write-up. Fatal cock-ups would be because the pilot had not truly understood what he was committing to. I never had to consider such an approach in engine icing conditions, but I expect having a plan and sticking to it would have made the difference then as always.

Which brings us to the trembling knee. In truth this problem only arose when you were low and slow. Trim was the complete answer, as soon as you had done all the other things dictated by the emergency.

The Meteor offered more of a problem than the Canberra – the rudder forces were greater and the trim could never be wound on fast enough. For me, with long legs (but I do not see why this should not be true for every pilot other than Douglas Bader), the answer here was to have adjusted the pedals and straps appropriately, and to straighten the leg and to lock it “over centre” at the knee as soon as Big Rudder was required. Then trim could be left until the rest of the problem was dealt with.

My early accident happened because my poor, amiable, instructor did not appreciate how stupid I was. Training (by self and others) is the core of my story. Which brings me to Bassingbourne in early 1962, just airborne in a T4 with Flt Lt John Stanley in the right hand seat – a sort of Final Exam in asymmetrics. I still cannot work out what he was going to do if one of his students got it wrong. Perhaps there is an entire PPRuNe thread dealing with that master of this particular topic.

[Tinribs]

All the above comments are so true but need a bit of filling up.

The canberra rudder system involved a large spring which acted to give a seeming feel against airspeed. The spring consisted of a tube which could twist a bit. To shorten the tube it was folded inside itself to create a telescope effect although it was one piece. When it got a bit tired you could push the pedal but all you did was compress the spring not move the rudder. Rudder/fin stalling at high angles and low airspeed could occur especially if yawing/rolling created a localised airflow disturbance. I lost one big time on an airtest with pete somerfield in the back, being ham fisted really. I was the maint TP at the 23mu, aldergrove, and we tried hard to make sure the thing was within limits, mostly it worked.

The official line was always "if you fly it correctly you will be ok", people didn't and about a crew a year died for twenty years. In the end a new drill was agreed which involved fly at safety speed to decision point then close the live throttle and put the flap down. It worked and the chop rate pretty much stopped except for the odd few. Last one I think was Paddy Thompson, Mr Canberra, at Cyprus right at the end, I could be wrong cos it was a long time ago.

The rule was once decision made aircraft must be landed preferably on the runway if possible with the gear down. I had the problem on a roller landi ng at Leconfield and my instructors voice fron Cottesmore, Clive Hall. great bloke, came back to me.... "land the B........" 2 out of 3 isn't bad.

The 9 was different having hydraulic controls. I flew them on39SQN and later the SC 9 XH132 at RAE bedford. Always treated it with great respect not fear. We got airborne with 85%, about half thrust, then accelerated to 200 ish then climb power, went like an angel

[rlsbutler]

@tinribs

Lots of good experience. I had forgotten about the torque-tubes. I assume that the risk was covered by a rule I vaguely remember: not to allow more than a ball’s width of slip.

My last flying was out of Llanbedr, which was part of the RAE empire so we could fly the Canberra solo if we wished; a bit strange, like going to the cinema on your own. The station’s pilots would nav for each other. One of our roles was to go out into the North Atlantic to fire the supersonic Stiletto at F4s under the control of the radar on Benbecula. I think the pilot could have fired the missile himself and the nav task was not onerous - but each of us was glad of a bit of company, at least on the outbound leg.

You thought Paddy Thompson’s was the last asymmetric accident. That was in 1980 and seems not to have been practice asymmetric on the approach but a catastrophic engine failure on takeoff. I never heard the details, but I continue to nurse the presumption that Paddy would have handled it if it could have been handled.

I have done a little sweep of Google and found two later cases: (1) T4 WJ877 at Wyton in March 1991 – an apparently reckless and disastrous practice engine failure on takeoff and (2) T4 WJ866 at Marham in September 2004 - the classic old-school approach cock-up that you had in mind.

R

[Rich_Slater]

Small world - the Just Flight office where I'm based is about a half-mile from where WJ877 came down in Huntingdon. My Grandmother was one of the witnesses entered into the record.

I don't suppose any of you ex-Canberra chaps still have your old startup/shutdown checklists, or know of anyone who does have a copy?

Thanks

[alwayslookingup]

Risbutler, you might like to reconsider your comment on the 2004 crash.

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/143442-marham-crash.html

[Wander00]

Risbutler : T4 WJ877 at Wyton in March 1991 – an apparently reckless and disastrous practice engine failure on takeoff - just re-read the Accident Summary - disastrous, obviously: can see nothing about "reckless" though, so suggest you might make an amendment to your post

[Bill Macgillivray]

Rich, I still have my PR7 Pilot's Notes and, (somewhere fairly close, the T4 FRC's) PM me and I will dig them out and send a scanned copy if you wish.
Bill :ok:

[rlsbutler]

@alwayslookingup and @wander00

Always ready to be corrected, I was reporting to Rich Slater after a Google rummage to find the Wolverhampton and at least one other summary site. My comments may be unjustified in truth but derived from comments on those sites.

I shall take a bit of time to find out for myself what you are telling me. I shall post again in a few days.

[dragartist]

You may be interested to read the local St Ives town crier. Four articles about Wyton. Alarmist on front page about the base closing! No its just the airfield. the base is growing with the influx of Geospatial Fusion spooks and the Really Large Corps. The Air Ambulance have been consulted! then on another page Steve Thornber celebrates the 100 year old Sox Socket - Good show that man. Sadest of all is the need for contractors to scrub up the PR9 gate gurd. In years past the Girls Venture Corps looked after the PR7 or was it the Ex 51 B6? this would have made a smashing project for the local Air Cadets. Along the line as the Scouts who adopted the Comet beside the old POL huts. Yes I served at Wyton on and off from 81 to 2011 and recall all these things. particularly sad to revive the memories of the Assymetric crashes. My wife baby sat at the house on the Oxmoor only days before. I remember Reg comming to congratulate us when we swapped Nimrods one day. A week later he was gone. Saddest of all was the loss of the two other guys.
Just months before I retired I was up at Wyton picking up MT in the early hours. The place was eiry. All I could hear in the silence was the drone of Lancasters and Mosquitoes circling overhead before heading off to their targets for the night.
Perhaps the RAF Wyton PR machine should take over editorial responsibility for the RAF News.

[Tinribs]

I think the Oxmoor crash had my mate Laurie Davies in the back, especially annoying as he had been with me at Leconfield years before in a similar event which we survived because of Clive Halls efforts to bash "loss of control on one engine into me"

The aircraft must be landed, preferably on the runway if possible with the gear down. We made it that day, two out of three isn't bad. Thanks Clive

Laurie's body was on fire in the gutter and news photgrapher called Geoff Garret published phots in the a daily and later in the Am Phot. Never to be forgiven

[27mm]

Hi Risbutler,

IIRC, Paddy Thompson's accident occurred at Akrotiri, just after take-off, while towing a banner.

[options770]

Reg was a flight commander when I was on 7 Sqn at St Mawgan. A good man.

On another note, I only once was faced with landing on only one engine after an air test when I couldn't get a relight. The adrenalin was flowing well and it was probably the best, most accurate approach I ever made. I had to be towed in because it was impossible to turn against the good engine on the ground, at least it gave me time to wipe my forehead. :O

[WH904]

I have fond memories of 7 Squadron at St.Mawgan. As a "civvie" and a mere teenager, I got my first passenger ride in a jet courtesy of 7 Sqn (in WJ715). We went on a pretty standard flight to Plymouth to act as a silent target for the gunners but what a great experience for a youngster.

I remember the mock attack displays that were mentioned earlier in this thread. For many years St.Mawgan's air show included a fly-by performed by a Nimrod and four Canberras in box formation. They usually performed their mock airfield attack during the show and it was a delight to see Canberras being thrown around with a bit of flair.

I spent many days watching the aircraft come and go at St.Mawgan. Aside from the main fleet of TT18s, the T4 fleet included WJ861and WT483, both of which seemed to be flying around the circuit almost every day. However I was particularly interested in the two T19s (WH904 and WH903) that were with 7 Squadron for a few years until around 1976. Both wore the standard light grey paint scheme with dayglow orange trim, and with their big, black radomes they always looked very smart.

WH903 was eventually scrapped (the nose survives) but WH904 went to the Newark AIr Museum. Oddly, the museum staff fitted tip tanks to the aircraft even though the T19 never carried them (apart from the sole Swedish example). I asked NAM about this and somebody claimed that the aircraft was collected from Cambridge with tanks fitted, but this is nonsense - I'm old enough to remember!

Sadly, they also painted over the lovely 7 Squadron circle emblem on the tail, and applied 85 Squadron markings. For many years you could still see the 7 Sqn emblem and tail code under the grey paint, if you caught the aircraft against sunlight at the right angle.

I've tried time and time again to find a photo of WH904 or WH903 wearing 7 Squadron's markings, but no such pictures seem to have survived. Anyone ever seen one anywhere?

[Wadd HC exhibits]

Hello, can someone confirm how many starter cartridges the B2 had per engine?
Also are there any good picures demonstrating it being fitted or used on a B2, I have tried Google but didn't see what I was after.

Thanks

[Wander00]

B2 and derivatives ie T4, T17 had 1, others had 3, PR9 had AVPIN. Sorry no pic

[BBadanov]

Correct - B.2 had 1. Our B.2s (A84-125 and A84-307) here in Oz were converted to T.21 trainers and retained what we called the "Avon Mk 1" with single cartridge. Similarly, our early B.20s were spec'd on the B.2 and had the single-cartridge Avon Mk 1 (aircraft A84-201 to A84-227).

The later B.20 production (A84-228 to A84-248) were spec'd on the B.6 and had the "Avon Mk 109" engine with the triple cartridge breech.

On a related matter, I saw B.20 A84-242 in the paint shop at RAAF Amberley on Tuesday. It was being primed in readiness for its Vietnam camouflage scheme for display in the base's Aircraft Heritage Centre.

[Tinribs]

The cartridges were bigger than might be expected and made of brass. The quality was excellent in the early days but fell off towards the end. You will often see them being sold in antiques shops and booter. Most people think they are cannon shell but the base is marked "Crt Elec St" which gives a clue there is a range of ops so something No 9 mK 2 for example.

Cartridges or cartridges depending on the type were held in a fitting at the front centre of the intake fronted by a large knurled knob suitable for hand operation. The knob had a button in the centre. To undo the fitting bash the knob in firmly and unscrew the fitting about five turns. The fitting and attached cartridge may now be withdrawn and a new cartridge fitted to the claws. Replace is revers. We normally carried a rack of six cartridges in the rear hatch.

We were fond of borrowing the cartidges which could be cut down to excllent ash trays or fitted with a handle and plated to make a beer mug. Mostly we kept the cartridges which had special significance such as after an accident or the last one on retirment. No one seemed to mind where they went, there was no obvious auditing or recording.

[PCDC]

Tinribs is correct – there was no auditing from what I can remember and a ‘useful’ commodity they were too!

I remember staging through Nice and being told that it could take an age to get fuel.

So using my ‘initiative’ I stood in front of the jet with arms held high holding the 2 used cartridges – instant BP truck!! :ok:

[Tigger_Too]

A starter breach failure away from home sorted out the men from the boys. The way round it was to start one engine using the good breach. Get the nav to stand in front of the running engine, unscrew the breach and then screw in the duff one.

He would then screw the good breach with a fresh cart into the other engine and Robert's your father's brother!

Letting go of the breach at the moment critique involved a LOT of paperwork.

[NutLoose]

Take it your all aware the PR9 at Kemble is about to fly again soon.


Canberra to fly at Kemble (http://www.aeroplanemonthly.com/news/latest-news/347-canberra-to-fly-at-kemble)


..

[dragartist]

Wadd HC and others:

Last days of RAE Bedford - Aircraft Departures - YouTube

Some footage here of Canberra start ups. My Dad, Eric (Started on the OCU at Bassingborne in 54 finsished on the OCU at Wyton before going to RAE) can be seen struggling with his ear defenders. He is now deaf!

We have several carts at home. the older ones are certainly better made and better brass. I spent many hours with Brasso/ wadpol.

One of my last EWAU design jobs was the bigger AvPIN tank cover for the 9. correcting a FRA Bournmouth cock up where the leading edge cover interfered with the cap.

[Wadd HC exhibits]

I had seen some conflicting info on the web and knew this would be the right place to clear it up :D


Think I read that the early ones only had 2 exhaust for the starter and 3 on the later marks which is one of the ways to spot the difference on start up if needed.

[Oldlae]

I was on the B(I)8's at Wildenrath, the starter held 3 cartridges and had 3 exhausts. We often had to do single engine starts and we left the engine covers on the other engine. Most of our engine covers had 3 holes which lined up with the starter exhausts. I did it once, starting the LH (No1)engine and looking at the ground crew and feeling for the start button pressed the wrong one. No damage done, the engine covers didn't get sucked in.

[Box Brownie]

Oldlae, you have taken me back in time! Dad was the admin NCO on 88 Sqdn and I played football for the sqdn. I have put a number of photos of
XH134 at Kemble on to the HAA ( Historic Aircraft Association ) website.

[MMHendrie1]

There are some first-hand accounts of Canberra flying (PR7, TT18/B2/T4) during the 1970s (XIII Sqn and 7 Sqn) in Winged Warriors - The Cold War from the Cockpit. (See www.wingedwarriors.co.uk (http://www.wingedwarriors.co.uk))

[95i]

I wonder if anybody here could help me with a question concerning the very beginning of Canberras on Laarbruch being equipped with US nuclear bombs.
When did the QRA-business start?
Must have been in 1960. Any exact date?

There is a report by Grp Cpt Wheeler about a C-130 bringing the first nuclear weapons to Laarbruch.
It says: 1960.

Interesting story, by the way: I suppose far and away the greatest incident during my time at Laarbruch was the arrival of the American tactical nuclear weapons in 1960. We were to be the first RAF station in Germany to
receive these weapons which were to be used by No. 16 Squadron then equipped with Canberras. We had been given due warning that the weapons were going to be flown to us from a base in France. My Wing Commander Flying, then Wing Commander W.E. Colahan ( who has since died ) was under the impression that the weapons would be delivered in a twin-engined C82-Transport. In fact, on the day, they came in a CI30 which is considerably bigger.
-After landing, the C 130 was taxying to the nuclear weapon site when it struck a tree with one of its wings and ruptured its fuel tanks. I had a very difficult situation on my hands because the young and inexperienced American guards, who were fully armed, immediately surrounded the aircraft and wouldn't let the fire-engine on the airfield get anywhere near the aircraft. This
was extremely serious and I had to take a firm stand. I explained that, unless the U.S. guards allowed the fire tender to spread foam on the fuel, because of the nuclear weapons etc., I would have to use force to overpower them. There were not many of them, and they finally and very reluctantly gave way. I had explained to the young captain that we had no interest in looking at
the weapons, but it was most serious to have all the fuel flowing from the aircraft with nothing being done about it. I assured him that I would do all in my power to protect him from his authorities who might consider that he should not have allowed anybody to get near the aircraft.

[smujsmith]

Hmmm,

I have to wonder about this reported incident. I know of an RAF Albert hitting a tree, and doing some damage, at Wildenrath. Never heard of the "injured Albert" shipping nukes. Maybe it was one of the "cousins" Alberts? Whatever I've just finished reading Mike Brooks, Bucket of Sunshine, a great read and no mention of such an incident. I bet someone on the Mil forum will know something though :ok:

[95i]

I've read the "Bucket of Sunshine" as well. Great book with a lot of interesting information.
But Mike Brooke arrived at Laarbruch sometime mid 1964.
Is "Albert" the nickname for the Hercules C-130? Never heard it before.

[Lukeafb1]

95i,

Yes. 'Albert' is the nickname of the C -130. Rather like the nick name 'Cranberry' for the Canberra. Although the latter is a name coined very late in the Canberra's life, since I was on Canberras for 16 years in the 60s and 70s and we never called it a Cranberry.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Albert is, of course, the shortened version. The full name is Fat Albert.

[BBadanov]

I was on Canberras from late '60s to mid '70s, never heard the term 'Cranberry' until I joined the RAF in 1979.
Which was also the first time I heard the F-4 called the 'Toom', or "Tomb'.

[ICM]

In acknowledging that 'Fat Albert' is a nickname adopted in the RAF for the C-130, I believe that the name may have been first used for the C-5A within USAF's Military Airlift Command. It was certainly already in being when the first aircraft arrived at Travis AFB in 1970, with HQ MAC trying hard, but fruitlessly, to stamp it out. (And I don't recall ever hearing anyone at that time use the term for a 130.)

[Davef68]

The aircraft in the alleged incident would have been a USAF C-130, the RAF Hercules entered service in the late 60s (The mention of the C-82 points to it being one of the very early USAF Hercules).

[tezzer]

Just finished it on my kindle this afternoon, very entertaining read.

Moved onto "Warthog" about the A-10s in GW1, not as yet entertaining, but will give it a chance.

[GGR]

C5 was known as Fat Albert by all during NATO EX Hellenic Express, 1971 IIRC. I worked in Ops. Great time had by all, work or play......

[Bernoulli]

Re the starter cartridges: I've still got a live one somewhere. No accounting done at all. They were very useful for;

1. Setting fire to pianos.
2. Extracting the cordite from within to then put inside shoe polish tins and place gently on the barbecue.
3. Starting Canberras.

Re the Machrihanish Escape Tunnel. We began the dig out of 'Stalagluft Machrihanish' by cutting back the turf with our curved survival knives and continued with some spoons nicked from the Mess.

Happy days in a knackered old bomber.

Bernoulli

[Scottie66]

Bernoulli,

Thank you. Now my colleagues might believe me when I tell them about Tom, Dick and Harry and the escape from Machrihanish. I'd forgotten all about cordite in boot polish tins. I do recall the 40th Anniversary and police arriving just after a piano had been ignited with a starter cart. When the police asked the officer who was playing the burning piano to accompany him to the guard room he quickly quipped back with "I'm sorry I don't know that one". Great days.

[Bernoulli]

I seem to recall that it was a 2 week detachment for most of us. The Canberras were there pulling Rushton targets for the Rapiers on Benbecula. Normally we'd do this task out of Kinloss but it was closed for runway resurfacing and so the three TT18s were exiled to Machrihanish.

Nissen huts and camp beds in the middle of nowhere. We felt like POWs. And what must a British Officer do if imprisoned? He (all aircrew were 'he' back then) must attempt to escape.

So we hatched a plot, formed a Committee, nicked some spoons and started digging. Most of the time between sorties was spent working on the tunnel. We each had a sacrificial flying suit for the purpose and we went so far as to fill our pockets with the dry sandy soil and drizzle it down our trouser legs as we strolled about on the grass. Various lengths of wood were obtained and the tunnel was partially lined. Shallow trays were fashioned to support the turf at one end and the soil and wheat in the field at the other end.

Finally the evening of the mass breakout came. I seem to recall all six of us climbing out of the tunnel into this field of young wheat, carefully replacing the lid and setting off to Machrihanish village. Some place was found and our 'escape' was celebrated with gusto. After far too many pints of gusto we shambled off home. Staggering through the dunes on the shore and golf course we all got split up. The airfield perimeter on that side of the base was, shall we say, loosely patrolled, and really wasn't much of an obstacle. Not so on the other side facing the public road: 10ft concrete posts and chain link wire. Gav Nichol was found by the RAF Police trying to climb the wire convinced that he was climbing into the base. He'd pottered across the entire airfield and technical site without noticing a thing. Good effort!

Not sure if the tunnel was used again. It was eventually rumbled when the farmer came to harvest his crop and put a wheel through the rather flimsy lid. Looking down into the hole he was convinced that someone was trying to break into the base and being a good citizen he alerted the authorities. Que a large WRAF Admin Office sent to investigate. Stern words and the boys were told to stop being silly and fill the tunnel up again PDQ.

Looking back through my log book I think the above all took place 23 Jun - 04 Jul 1986. Trev Jarvis, Tom Barbour, Nick Petts, Jeff Coker, Kev Baldwin. Caveat.....it's quite a while ago.

The flying on 100Sqn was not the most thrilling but we did have fun.

Cheers

Bernoulli

[Hueymeister]

Tom Barbour was one of my QFIs on basic in 1989. Had a habit of climbing things and hanging off them to surprise us poor studes!

[maxchord]

I have been spending an interesting few weeks transferring all my flight time to an electronic logbook - for reasons that are no longer apparent to me - and I just finished the part relating to The Canberra Conversion Course at Cottesmore in early 1974 before going to 100 Sqn at West Raynham, I got there via Gnats, Vulcans and four years on Bloodhounds, also at West Raynham.

Lot of good stuff here, I was trying to remember the icing let down procedure, but having read this thread, the stark horror all returns. There is a special place in Hell reserved for QFI's that relished in pulling a good engine at rotate, some 45kts below Vmca as I recall. I also vividly remember having to redo my FHT as my asym work wasn't up to scratch.. The log book records 13 consecutive EFATO's and EFOF's in 90 minutes of thigh trembling cold sweat. Being of limited stature, full rudder was a stretch, but I swear my leg developed an emergency extension capability, or perhaps it was the lifts in my boots. The subsequent trip back to the flight office was accomplished on all fours...

Great aeroplane to fly, some great memories of 100 Sqn, and my last posting before joining the mass exodus in 1975 - it was that or another ground tour, possibly (if I really behaved myself) a co-pilot slot in the Vulcan again... Since the PSS drone at MoD who gave me this glad tiding wouldn't look me in the eye, I figured the writing was on the wall.

[RetiredBA/BY]

As an ex Canberra driver (and a QFI) surely no-one is ever going to throttle an engine at a speed which is not controllable and VMCA -45 k seems suicidal. I seem to remember the minimum safe speed for a Canberra was 140 knots. If an engine failed below that speed, then the drill was to close the other throttle and land ahead and accept the barrier or whatever !!

140 knots, full rudder and some bank towards the live engine, drilled into my head at Bassingbourn ! Kept me alive on the two engine failures I did have !

Or have I really lost my marbles ??

[keithl]

Yes, Vmca -45 isn't credible. When I did my C to I on 'berras, we went to 5 or 6000 ft to demo an engine failure below Vmca and it was rather impressive.

To answer the ME vs FJ question - I still have the posting notice from 100Sqn ("PLT ME") to 13(PR) Sqn ("PLT FJ") to prove I was an FJ pilot - just!

[rlsbutler]

Agreed Vmca - 45, by definition, does not work. Yet that Vmca was very different as between an half-full T4 with no tip-tanks and the B2 with full tip-tanks.

Flying off Bassingbourn's 2000 yards, you had to know what you were doing (with a full B15 out of Labuan, there was a brief period when it did not matter what you knew).

The notorious instructor, in my time as a student, was John Stanley. You knew he would cut the throttle early enough to make the full and correct response essential - never mind Vmca. John traded in terror, but he must have made his mind up that you were not at all likely to boot the wrong rudder. He has to have got that right every time.

[BBadanov]

He has to have got that right every time.

That is interesting rlsbutler - I wonder how many T4 QFIs guessed wrong and dived the wrong way, and we will never know.

[Wander00]

I can think of at least one where it went disastrous, and one (No QFI involved) where the nav left the pilots to it, but unfortunately died.

[maxchord]

Well Gentlemen - it was all nearly 40 years ago and the passage of time may well have changed my perception into a perceived reality.... and exactly when that finger snuck out and hooked itself around the throttle is lost to the mists of time.... Suffice to say, my logbook is littered with EFATO's and EFOF's and with an inside leg measurement of 28", the result from my point of view was a knee-trembler of the worst kind... I always felt sorry for the poor bugger in the back whose sole contribution - as I recall - was to read a checklist... I salute their memory.

The Canberra was fun to fly, and a challenge - an icing letdown always added spice to the day - and closing the throttle on the good engine at 600ft (and 145kts..?), dumping flap then waiting the 16-19 seconds for the barn door effect that would hopefully coincide with the threshold.... That exercise did lead to the highlight of my short career - a PD to Binbrook with a SE landing in a B2 where the wind wasn't quite as I expected, resulting in a loud bang shortly after touchdown and an abrupt heading change towards the weeds. I swear I was still doing 60kts when the Nav appeared and started wrestling with the door, he thankfully waited until the cursing had stopped before it was wrenched out of his hands and a swarm of firemen appeared to rescue us. I achieved a lifetime ambition that day - a ride in a shiny red fire engine - however it only delivered me to the Boss of the Lightning squadron whose precious aeroplanes it was my misfortune to have spread across the countryside while we were waiting for a spare tire... I don't think I have ever seen anyone quite so upset and not have a coronary on the spot. I probably shouldn't have laughed.

At least they let me fly it home - and an appointment with the T4 again...

[Wander00]

I can still remember as though it was yesterday (and it was 1966) roaring across the fens at 200 ft doing crit speeds with Robin Rose in the right hand seat and him looking oh so relaxed. Not sure the nav was so relaxed!

[Yellow Sun]

The notorious instructor, in my time as a student, was John Stanley. You knew he would cut the throttle early enough to make the full and correct response essential - never mind Vmca. John traded in terror,

Now would that be the same John Stanley who later gravitated to the Vulcan and eventually the GSU? I heard it said (apocryphally I'm sure) that on a GSU ride with him the first engine would fail as you turned onto the taxiway and it all went downhill from there!

YS

[RetiredBA/BY]

"The notorious instructor, in my time as a student, was John Stanley. You knew he would cut the throttle early enough to make the full and correct response essential - never mind Vmca. John traded in terror, but he must have made his mind up that you were not at all likely to boot the wrong rudder. He has to have got that right every time."

As an ex QFI I can't imagine that any instructor would trust to luck that his stude would'nt put in the wrong rudder. I am sure he would have decided which engine to fail, would have braced the "wrong" rudder and been ready to immediately feed in the correct rudder if the stude failed to do it. Messing around with the rudder on a Canberra following (even simulated) engine failure at low height and speed, was potentially disastrous.

The Canberra was a delight on 2, a big JP, but after flying two Vs, the VC10 and several Boeings, my conclusion is that on one engine it was the worst of the lot, B. dangerous in fact ! On the other hand something like the B767 even when fully loaded was quite straightforward on one engine even after a V1 cut .

[maxchord]

I was in upstate NY this summer visiting the Wings of Eagles Discovery Centre, which has a great collection of aeroplanes and some of the most knowledgeable museum docents I've ever come across. They have a early US B2, sadly deteriorating in a field outside, but it has the familiar bubble canopy of the Brit version although different engines. Info here (http://www.wingsofeagles.com/?page_id=547)
I worked for Flight Safety in Houston, TX in the late 80's and NASA at nearby Ellington AFB were operating two or three long wing WB-57F's, 122ft wingspan, high altitude recce (82,000 ft), on mostly high altitude sampling missions. They needed a recurrent ground school, so as the token Brit I got to write, and then teach it to the NASA pilots. The aeroplane bears almost no similarity to anything I've flown, but it was fascinating to talk to the pilots about the problems flying that beast - maximum bank angle 3 degrees on final, and it wouldn't stop flying in ground effect... I shudder to think what a V1 cut would be like in that, I suspect they just don't do it.

The aeroplane has been overshadowed by the U2, but in reality is a very useful high altitude vehicle, with the benefit of a two man crew and 6,000lb payload rather than one pilot and about 200lbs. The aeroplane is still in service, in fact one was brought out of mothballs this year and put in service last August. They operate in low viz, mostly unmarked paint schemes, and operate for "A Government Agency" in Afghanistan.

Wiki info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin/General_Dynamics_RB-57F_Canberra)

[binbrook]

Didn't remember his name, but I remember the kerfuffle - lots of witnesses, Buffer Zone infringement, etc, etc, and a sense-of-humour failure somewhere. Didn't move fast enough and for my pains got lumbered with the Summary of Evidence.

[maxchord]

Binbrook - To what incident are you referring....?

[binbrook]

Sorry Maxchord - it was Sharpend's tale about the Canberra at Garmisch (spring 1969?) which this very new boy has just come across. The Rhine bridges were not mentioned in the Summary I'm happy to say - unlike 'Skiers' no-one had been 'unwise' enough to enter them in the Authorisation Book!

[maxchord]

Well, thanks for that - I was beginning to worry about visiting the Homeland...

[binbrook]

SE handling has had an airing and I thought it might be interesting to quote from EE's (Roneod foolscap) Provisional Pilot's Notes for the B6 and PR7. Safety speed was given as 160kt and you were informed that with an EFATO at weights below about 33000lb control could be maintained at 'as low as 135kt'. For the approach, 'after turning on to finals reduce speed to 125kt and lower the flaps'. Going round again 'can be done comfortably provided that the speed is at least 125kt. . . . In an emergency, and at light weights, going round is possible from speeds down to 110kt. . . . About 200ft of height will be lost during the period while the aircraft is accelerating to 120kt.' It helpfully added that 'The rolling motion due to yaw is pronounced.' Struth!

OCU margins were safer and we had all flown Meteors first, even if it was just 30 hours of knee-trembling on the Short Asymmetric Course at Worksop. When told at Bassingbourn to go round (no pre-flight briefing for it of course), I used the Meteor 'bunt-accelerate-climb' technique - wrong! 'Just use enough power to climb away, about 7000 will do.' Had Vmca been invented? All I remember were Safety Speed, which was in PN, and Crit Speed, which your instructor discovered on Ex 1 and seemed to depend largely on how well-adjusted your rudder-pedals were and how rigid was the sole of your boot. Beyond a certain point weren't you just twisting torque-tubes anyway?

And please don't be nasty about John Stanley! He was of his time and, if it was good enough for John, it really was good enough.

[dragartist]

Not sure if it appropriate to resurrect an old thread. Mods please delete post if you see fit. From our Huntingdon Council magazine an appeal for information. (I am not involved at all just passing on the message). the Council are considering a memorial some 40 years on. (3rd May 1977). Anyone who feels the need please mail Natasha *** pierson at huntingdontown *** gov *** uk. 01480 410384.

[Brian W May]

Memorial to the crew or those on the ground on the estate affected?

[dragartist]

Hi Brian,
The article does not state specifically.


"Memorial area near to the site of the accident to remember the lives lost and pay respect to the families whose lives were effected by the tragedy"


My interpretation is both.


Link here but No 69 with a very nice pick of HM on front cover not available at the moment.


About Town | Huntingdon Town Council (http://www.huntingdontown.gov.uk/about-town.html)


My own view for what it is worth. - Any memorial up there will soon be vandalised.

[Brian W May]

When I lived at Ramsey and served at Wyton, the Oxmoor Estate was 'well-known'.

Unless it's changed much, sadly I suspect your observation is likely to happen. I must confess to being baffled frankly, why now? With everything else going on in the country/world I'm surprised they're contemplating this.

When I was Deputy SFSO at Wyton, I gave a presentation on that accident. We then wrote an exercise scenario to test the Crash and Disaster Plan, sadly when I was returning from a Tristar trip from the Gulf, I was stuck in the traffic jam caused by our scenario coming to fruition which was sadly fatal too.

[Tinribs]

LD (Nav) was a good friend of mine and I can well remember the squadron fury at photos of his body on fire in a gutter being printed by a national newspaper. After our protest the photographer GG again printed them in the Am Phot to serve the "public interest"
It was especially poignant for me because LL had survived a similar event with me by selecting a lucky pilot that day
Turning to a memorial. LL was an orphan but he did have a girl friend, there is limited scope for family involvement. I remember the pilot having a family and being very much involved in RAF motor sport
I think the long lapse of time would display this effort as rather late, see Rudyard Kipling, the ballad of Tommy atkins

[Odanrot]

Ditto Tinribs too little too late.

Dreadful day remember it too well. LD and JA good guys RIP.

That photo is still with me.