Shorts Belfast for sale

[hunty]

Afternoon all

Don't think this has been posted before, but Shorts Belfast RP-C8020 has been advertised for sale for $980,000.
The company advertising her is a company named Flightstar of Miami and the advert can be found at. www.flightstartrading.com (http://www.flightstartrading.com)


Cheers

Hunty :rolleyes:

[VP8]

SCRAP IT!!!!http://www.motorhomefacts.com/modules/Forums/images/smiles/5eek.gif

[bingofuel]

Maybe the RAF could buy it as an interim measure until the A400 arrives............

[Heavy Cargo]

:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:

[Hounddog1]

Find a sugar daddy and get it back to UK, donate it to Duxford along with other british airliners that need to be remembered. Its been a good stalwart over its time...

[Siguarda al fine]

Wow thats one hell of a price when they only paid 125kUSD for it and all they have done since is wear it out.

[Skystar320]

Heavy Cargo, I thought you said it was sold to South America?

[flying officer kite]

My understanding is that some form of deal to South America has been made, but i dont know if it has left Cairns in Oz. So many classic aircraft die in South America, i hope its not the case for the last SC5

[ferrydude]

Well this operator could use a compatible replacement aircraft:eek:

http://www.independent.co.ug/index.php/cover-story/cover-story/82-cover-story/2761-lake-victoria-crash-plane-was-junk-probe-report

[sled dog]

Welcome to African aviation :eek:

[oceancrosser]

How many aircraft are there on the bottom of Lake Victoria???

[STANDTO]

always wondered why the Belfast looked like the C130

[ferrydude]

Chicken and egg. I've always wondered why the Belfast, C-130, AN-22 all look like the C-133?:rolleyes:

[D-LZ 126]

Pretty sure -130 was designed first...not that it means a whole lot, you have a mission, aerodynamics will dictate similar looking 'planes.

[Old Fella]

The C130 was first flown in August 1954. The C133 first flew in April 1956. Different aircraft for different roles, the C130 being designed for tactical work and the C133 for strategic transport.

[JW411]

Before anyone asks what the difference between the Belfast and the C-133 was it was mainly that our one worked and their one didn't.

Not one single Belfast disappeared without trace or crashed which is more than could be said about the C-133.

By the way, I had a Belfast friend who flew both of them.

[ferrydude]

Risk and exposure. The -133 operated in much larger numbers, and was in military service longer than the handful of Belfasts. :rolleyes:

[Mechta]

Wikipedia infers the C-133's stall was the cause of several accidents, including one which stalled at the top of the climb to cruise altitude.

Assuming this wasn't a low level mission, what sort of stall characteristic did the C-133 have and why, to not be able to recover if it had a fair bit of height?

[JW411]

ferrydude:

C-133

13/04/58 54-0146 Fatalities: 4 Georgetown GE.

10/06/01 57-1614 Fatalities: 8 Near Tachikawa at sea 33 minutes after T/O.

27/05/62 57-1611 Fatalities: 6 Crashed at sea 32 minutes after take off from Dover AFB.

10/04/63 59-0523 Fatalities: 9 Crashed 3/4 miles short of Travis AFB.

31/07/63 56-2005 Burnt out during ground refuelling at Dover AFB.

22/09/63 59-2002 Fatalities: 7 Took off from Dover AFB for Lajes and was never seen again. Last heard of 57 minutes after take-off.

07/11/64 56-2014 Fatalities: 7 Near Goose Bay. Stalled after take off. Right wing dropped. Left wing dropped. Impacted nose high.

11/01/65 54-0140 Fatalities 6: Crashed 500 feet after take off at Wake Island.

30/04/67 59-0534 Fatalities 0: Near Oknawa all power lost after take-off and ditched in the sea 34 miles off the coast.

06/02/70 59-0530 Fatalities 10: Nr Patisade NE. Explosive decompression. Crashed in flames.

So, you had 50 C-133s and killed a huge number of crews.

We had 10 Belfasts on 53 Squadron and we still had 10 Belfasts when we were finally finished in the Defence Cuts in 1976.

By the way, we always had USAF exchange officers on the squadron and they were always a bit apprehensive that the Belfast looked a bit like the C-133 which scared the **** out of them.

I look forward to you making a logical case for the C-133 having had such a successful career.

In 53 Squadron we were very proud of the fact that we had the entire production run and, just before Christmas in 1971, we got all of them back for Christmas and flew them in formation. It was probably the only time that an entire production run was flown in formation.

I have the photographs!

[ferrydude]

Hmm, 10 aircraft in service for a total of 10 years. Doing what exactly?:confused:

[JW411]

Well my friend; I would have thought that you could have worked that for yourself.

For what it is worth, I am in the process of writing my second book (my first was an historical tome).

When I finish the latest book which is the history of my flying career, then you might just find out.

[ferrydude]

Looking forward to your version of history:hmm:

The C-133 carried more, flew more often, and much further. Combine that
with a fleet of 50 versus 10, a longer in service life, and you would expect a higher loss rate.

No arguing that there were design issues. Moot point.

Seesh, the Belfast currently being advertised has a whopping 11,200 Total Time:ugh:

[JW411]

So you are denying that 50 C-133s during it's service killed 57 aircrew and that makes it a much better aircraft than the Belfast that killed absolutely nobody?

Even if I were to take 57 killed out of 50 versus 0 killed out 10 then I know where I would want to be.

However, I bow to your superior knowledge. I have to admit that I only flew the Belfast for six years and you obviously preceeded the Wright Brothers by four good years so there is not much else that any of us can add.

[ferrydude]

With the the flight rate of the Belfast, you must have logged loads of time, LOL!


Not much exposure to danger sitting on the ramp.

If I understand your logic, the Belfast is superior as it hasn't had a hull loss?


Right then:D Do get us that book detailing the long and dangerous sorties

[Old Fella]

None can match the C130 Hercules in service safety record of the Royal Australian Air Force. Four models in service for varying periods, A-E-H & J, 12 of each. Fifty two years continuous operations and NEVER a loss, operating from the Antarctic to the Artic and most places in between. Now THAT IS SOME SORT OF RECORD. Go the Lockheed Legend.

[ferrydude]

Indeed, a fine record, and aircraft. However, if we apply the logic of Commander Belfast, it must be a crap airplane having had numerous hull losses and fatalities over the years with multiple operators.:rolleyes:

[MrBernoulli]

The link below to a C133 article may be of interest ............

The Curse of the Cargomaster | Military Aviation | Air & Space Magazine (http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/The-Curse-of-the-Cargomaster.html?c=y&page=1)

The Curse of the Cargomaster
Readied to transport the first U.S. ICBMs, the Douglas C-133 had a peculiar habit. It kept crashing.
By John Sotham * Air & Space Magazine, September 01, 2010

[ferrydude]

A few more choice quotes from the link;

"The C-133 had supported operations around the globe, and was even trusted with transporting Apollo command modules after they returned from the moon"

"They’d fly it again, if they had the chance. Among the group gathered at Delaware’s Dover Air Force Base, there’s a man for every crew station at the ready. They flew, maintained, navigated, and sometimes cursed one of the least understood aircraft in the history of the U.S. Air Force, the Douglas C-133 Cargomaster."

Reading the comments from those who know the airplane best are relevant as well

[411A]

Belslow for sale, hmmm...might make a great airport beer hall.

Of course, prior to civvy service, the UKCAA required a stick pusher to be fitted.
In the interim, ops were allowed with an additional crew member.
His job was to closely monitor the airspeed, and if deemed too slow, was to yell out...STALL, STALL!!!

High tech...all the way.:ugh:

[Hockham Admiral]

411A, Hi
"Of course, prior to civvy service, the UKCAA required a stick pusher to be fitted.
In the interim, ops were allowed with an additional crew member.
His job was to closely monitor the airspeed, and if deemed too slow, was to yell out...STALL, STALL!!!

I think it was actually "SPEED, SPEED" if the speed fell below VAT!

I did the actual stick-push air-tests with Douggie Page, then Marshalls' Chief Test Pilot. When we tried the 45Flap, U/C down and 350psi of torque on the engines, the stick-push didn't work and we stalled.....
Fortunately at 5000ft because we flicked inverted and where the sky should be there were green fields...and that wasn't an experience you'd like to try in any big aeroplane!!!
We upped our base height to 10,000ft after that!

[411A]

I think it was actually "SPEED, SPEED" if the speed fell below VAT!


Thanks for the clarification, Hockham Admiral, as I couldn't remember the exact phrase. The entire 'procedure' was written up in Flight International, many many years ago.

The C-133 was quite an advanced airplane for its time, according to some I've met who flew the type, however...it did, on occasion, have rather a bad reputation of chucking engines off the wing.
Something to do with the prop reduction gearbox, I think.
It was however, very large, could carry a lot, and was quite fast...and would fly far.
Not a bad combination.
A few were converted to civvy ops and used (mostly, as I recall) in Alaska.

[ferrydude]

c133 - boeing377 (http://sites.google.com/site/boeing377/c133)

[bvcu]

dont know much about either a/c but the point about the stick pusher was a CAA thing i believe . Werent the UK reg 727's the only ones required to have one ? how many of them were built !!!

[Croqueteer]

:eek:You've got me worried, JW411, when is your book coming out?

[411A]

...when is your book coming out?
The next obvious question might be...who would want to read it?:}

[Tankertrashnav]

If I understand your logic, the Belfast is superior as it hasn't had a hull loss?




I know little about Belfasts or C133's, but I do know something about the English language. I've often wondered which aircraft manufacturer first coined the euphemistic term "hull loss", as though it had been mislaid behind a hangar somewhere.

Sounds so much less scary than "crash", "fire" etc.

[Bigt]

Besides all the above `slightly off topic/thread drift` comments, where is it possible to register and operate the Belfast?
Im guessing that most licencing authorities would not entertain its application.....

[MR.X99]

Would of fit in well in Yellowknife once upon a time but I understand the Ice Road Truckers got alot of theta action.Still use for a good utility aircraft like that somewhere. Oil & Gas exploration.

[JW411]

411A:

Now none of us are getting any younger and it was 1972 when I got to the Belfast. However, I'm not sure that the habit that the C-133 had for shedding engines wasn't more connected to the electric props rather than the P&W T34 engines themselves.

I'm pretty sure in my own mind that Andy (my friend who did an exchange on the C-133) told me that there was an electrical scenario whereby all four props would feather and that could, at the very best, ruin your whole day. At the very worst, it could mean disappearing without trace.

You and I are old enough to remember aircraft that suffered cascading bus bars. The present generation wouldn't understand such a thing.

Nor would they believe that if you didn't remember to put the RR Dart into ground fine during the landing run then you would melt all four engines down within seconds as soon as you breathed on the throttles.

Incidentally, the freight bay on the Belfast was about the same length as the C-133 at just under 90 feet. However, since the C-133 was really designed for carrying IRBMs and ICBMs. it was a bit narrower.

The Belfast freight bay was a minimum of 12 foot square and was the only aircraft apart from the C-5A (and the Antonov) that could carry a JT-9 (complete with cowls etc). This we did for Pan American on a fairly regular basis.

We could also get a BAC 1-11 fuselage (or a Fokker 28) fuselage inside. All you had to with a Sikorsky S-61 (Sea King) was to take the main rotors off. Two Pumas went in easily back to back. We would take them to Belize and they were usually airborne within an hour of landing and unloading. All that was required was a quick rotor tracking check.

The aircraft was designed for moving indivisible loads and nothing else.

Having said that, one of the more bizarre loads that I ever did was a complete building for the Canadian DOT. We were at Gander on the way back from Forbes AFB when we got the request/order. The building was needed at Goose Bay and was in a hangar at St John's. So, we off-loaded and positioned down to St John's.

That year, the sea never did thaw out so we were being asked to shift the whole building by air. The building was complete right down to the toilets and even a flag pole complete with a flag! As best as I can recall, the whole thing weighed about 78,500 lbs. We would certainly not have got that sort of weight across the Atlantic!

[ferrydude]

Definitely a market, however it is being served nicely by much more suitable aircraft:cool:

[asmccuk]

Hi JW411,
I for one am looking forward to your next book.
Will it start back in PSC days?

[JW411]

ferrydude:

Let us just get one thing absolutely straight here.

I would not touch the Cairns Belfast with a forty-foot barge pole.

Sentimentality is one thing but I can guarantee you that anyone who gets involved is going to get their fingers burnt.

Apart from anything else, the Cairns Belfast was the most eccentric one of the fleet. She used to be XR365 and carried the name "Hector". You could get into "Hector" with five or six deferred defects in the tech log and by the time you got the other end, four of the defects had disappeared but another six new ones had appeared! If any of you out there can remember the wonderful BBC children's programme "The Magic Roundabout" then you will understand why the old girl was called "Silly Old Hector". It was certainly not a good idea to go flying unless she had a really good wet black nose.

By the way, I flew the very first civil-registered Belfast (if we are to forget that Short Brothers put the temporary registration of G-ASKE on the prototype XR362 for a photoshoot).

Which one? G-BEPS (XR368) at Manston on 14 February 1978.

Now I used to work for WR Christopher Foyle. After a huge amount of effort lasting about 8 years and long before the Berlin Wall came down, he managed to set up the Antonov Design Bureau operation. If I wanted to move anything nowadays then I would be looking for an Antonov 22, an Antonov 124 or, if it was particularly big and indivisible, the Antonov 225.

[JW411]

asmccuk:

It most certainly will include PSC time. In fact, that bit is already pretty well already written. What I am finding time-consuming is doing research to make sure that I have remembered things accurately. (For example, I got heavily into Willi Brandt the othe day vis a vis being intercepted by MIGs in the corridor).

I don't have any difficulty putting two sentences together (unlike some on pprune) but I reckon it will take me another year to get it all down and then possibly a bit to edit everything.

I am even considering the self-publishing option for, although that might be quite time consuming, I'm not writing a Joan Collins thriller and it would give me another challenge to keep me busy.

I would actually be very happy to end up with something like "Wilf's Book".

Moderator: sorry for the thread drift.

[fergineer]

JW just to put it right I think you meant Hectors house not Magic roundabout!!!!!!

[JW411]

Thanks for that; you are of course quite right.

[ciderman]

You be careful what you put in that nbook. We don't want anything about trips to Valencia/Volvo keys and grumpy old TRI's do we? :O

[BB954]

Is that fine Irishman John Mac N who used to fly the Belfast following this thread perchance? Do I remember some story about an Air Seychelles F28!!!

[Hockham Admiral]

Hot News! I heard this weekend (with a high degree of certainty) that the Belfast is sold....
Supposedly going to SA where I hope they know a lot about WAT...:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[VP8]

They still owe me for saving all the aircraft docs from the scrap bin when they cleared out Eng Control at Takely! :hmm::E

[Ada Quonsett]

AIR GIANT GOES UP - British Pathe (http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=43130)

[Porrohman]

First flight of the Shorts Belfast freighter aircraft
AIR GIANT GOES UP - British Pathe (http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=43130)
Did they really think it would do 500mph? :rolleyes:

If so, I can now understand why Shorts called it the Belfast but the crews called it the Belslow. :)

[JW411]

No we didn't; the unmodified ones were called Slowbacks and the modified ones were called Fastbacks.

[411A]

...were called Fastbacks.

Please define...Fastbacks.:{

[Pontius Navigator]

07/11/64 56-2014 Fatalities: 7 Near Goose Bay. Stalled after take off. Right wing dropped. Left wing dropped. Impacted nose high

I remember this one. Near Goose Bay does not tell the tale. It actually crashed into the tank farm on the edge of the airfield. Fortunately the tanks were full of kerosene otherwise there may have been many more fatalities.

On the Belfast's load capacity, in 1984 Heavylift delivered a very long and unbendable load to Ascension Island for onward delivery to the Falklands. The load was 57ft long which was longer than the floor of the C130 freight bay.

An enterprising mover schemed a set of trestles and loaded the cargo at the top of the bay so that the tail ramp could be closed.

[onesliceshort]

I totally agree..

[Porrohman]

the unmodified ones were called Slowbacks and the modified ones were called Fastbacks. Thanks for clarifying JW411. I'll bet even the Fastbacks didn't do 500mph though.

I was looking through some old photos yesterday and came across a picture of a Belfast at the Leuchars Airshow in 1974. I had forgotten that the Belfast had an air refuelling capability. I remember reading about C130s refuelling from Victors during the Falklands War and how difficult it was because the maximum cruise speed of the C130 was slightly less than the minimum refuelling speed of the Victor. The solution was to carry out the refuelling manoeuvre in a slight descent. Was the air-to-air refuelling capability of the Belfast ever used and, if so, was it also conducted in a slow descent in order to keep up with the Victor? Or could the Belfast cruise faster than a C130?

[Jamie-Southend]

I had forgotten that the Belfast had an air refuelling capability.

One of my first jobs @ SEN in the early eighties, to remove those pointy bits. :}

[JW411]

411A:

The Slowbacks were 11% down in predicted performance in all respects (height, speed etc etc). The Fastbacks were back on specification.

The problem was the amount of drag created by the shape of the rear fuselage. The Slowback fuselage came to a very nice point which looked good aesthetically but turned out to be an aerodynamic disaster.

So the design team went back to the drawing board and re-designed the entire ar*e end. This terminated in a blunt shape but, more cleverly, two vertical strakes were fitted underneath the rear fuselage.

These strakes were of a high-speed elongated diamond aerofoil section.

When we used to go to Lockheeds in Atlanta to pick up replacement C-130 centre sections (they won't go in a C-130) to take to Marshall's at Cambridge for fitting to RAF Hercs, some chaps from the Lockheed design office would sometimes come out to look carefully at the Fastback rear end solution.

I believe one of our crews was told by one of them that Lockheeds would have liked to have used this solution on the C-130 but Short Brothers had taken out an international patent and it would cost them a lot of money to use the idea. How true that is, I don't know.

In-flight refuelling:

I only know of one of my colleagues who ever succeeded in making contact with a tanker during trials. The system was never used in anger. The biggest problem was that the standard high-speed drogue basket went round and round in three foot circles at Belfast speeds so the tanker had to be fitted with a special low-speed drogue which was useless for everyone else.

The second problem was that we had to land after 15 hours or so anyway to check the engine oil so there was not a lot of point in being up there for longer than that.

However, the refuel probe was a great bit of kit if you were flying from the right seat for it was great for pointing at runways and assessing drift!

The whole refuel kit weighed about 1,200 lbs. Surprisingly, our lords and masters didn't start taking them off until 1975.

[Pontius Navigator]

The whole refuel kit weighed about 1,200 lbs. Surprisingly, our lords and masters didn't start taking them off until 1975.

IIRC there was one occasion, around 1973, when pax had to be offloaded as the aircraft had a probe whereas the load sheets had assumed no probe. That suggests not all had probes by then.

The probe weight 110lbs IIRC and would have had a significant effect on CoG.

On AAR, the problem was the need to activate a refuelling trail as we did not have enough tankers to maintain a route. Nor did we really have enough aircraft to make it worth activating a route.

For instance V-bombers could deploy to the far east faster than the route could be activated. Fighters needed to be escorted so again a tanker-escort was faster than a tanker activated route. The exception was the interim Victor 1 tanker that needed the route to be activated for the Victor to refuel. For transports like the VC10 and Belfast it was cheaper to stage than flight refuel.

Only after the Falklands did long range flight refuelling become a necessity.

[JW411]

Has anyone heard whether the Belfast survived the cyclone in Cairns or not?

[Old Fella]

JW411 As far as I know Cairns fared much better than at first anticipated. The "eye" passed over the coast some way south of Cairns at Mission Beach - Cardwell area. Innisfail, Cardwell, Mission Beach all got pretty well pounded. Almost the entire banana crop has been destroyed and also much of the sugar cane. Have not heard of any aircraft being damaged in Cairns.

[JW411]

Old Fella:

Thanks for your reply.

[carholme]

Here it is again from Barnstormers:

SHORTS BELFAST SC-5 SUPER


SHORTS BELFAST SC-5 SUPER • $1,100,000 • FOR IMMEDIATE SALE • INCLUDES: 10 x 40 foot shipping containers of spares 8 X ENGINES / PROPS • Contact Andrey V. Lovtsov - AERO ASIA CORP. LLC, Broker - located Almata Or Moscow, Kazakhstan • Telephone: +7 905-548-7888 . +7 926-606-2732 • Posted February 8, 2011 • Show all Ads posted by this Advertiser • Recommend This Ad to a Friend • Email Advertiser • Save to Watchlist • Report This Ad • Finance


carholme

[Porrohman]

• INCLUDES: 10 x 40 foot shipping containers of spares 8 X ENGINES / PROPS •
I wonder if these are all Belfast engines and props or if it includes the engines and props that were removed from the CL-44 Guppy at Bournmouth by Heavylift?

I presume that a good part of the reason why Heavylift are seeling the Belfast is that they'll have lost the work they used to do for the Australian military since the C-17s arrived.

[JW411]

More likely the engines and props that came off G-BEPS.

[ceejaypee]

There is already a Belfast preserved at the RAF Museum, Cosford in the UK West Midlands. It is housed within the Cold War building.. Admission is free. They are holding another open cockpit evening (£10 tickets must be purchased in advance) in September 2011. The Belfast will be included.:O

[Varipitch]

As with many other one-off aircraft, the 'Belslow' has been the subject of much speculation but little real action. Sources close to the owners state that it was indeed purchased along with the CL44-O Guppy. Indeed, this is borne out to some extent by the appearance of former Belfast enginners at BOH who have hung No's 2,3 and 4 Tyne on. Several consortium names HAVE been mentioned, rumour-repeat rumour had it that the Belfast's deposit had not been paid in time and the deal was off. Meanwhile in deepest Hurn, a rumour of similar strength (with proof actually) shows that the aircraft is officially grounded and that one previous CofA authority refused to de register the old girl due to 'outstanding financial issues.
All may become clearer this very weekend when a seminar of the world''s authorities on both types, convenes.

[eugenia]

This aircraft looks like it is getting ready to fly. It has been moved over near to the fire station, the HeavyLift titles have been painted over and the engines have been run. The registration hasn't changed at this stage anyhow.

[rwcgc]

work at cairns ga gossip is aircraft is beyond repair owner of belfast flying tiger oversize cargo is desperately trying to find a buyer for aircraft as they have only a matter of weeks before it will get scrapped like the heavylift 727

and so will geoff leachs dc3

:D:D:D

[4 Holer]

Ring HeavyLift in USA,Singapore or PNG HeavyLift Cargo Airlines (http://www.heavyliftcargo.com)
they could probably buy it back or move it.

[oceancrosser]

Ring HeavyLift in USA,Singapore or PNG HeavyLift Cargo Airlines
they could probably buy it back or move it.

I doubt anyone will answer... saw the derelict Belfast in Cairns a couple of weeks ago.

On another note 4Holer when will you guys bring the Diesel 8 to POM?

[Trim Stab]

Came across this thread when doing some research on the Belfast.

As I understand it, the reason the RAF only received ten of the original thirty aircraft originally ordered was that the US insisted that we buy C-130 as one of the conditions for monetary support during the 1965 Sterling crisis.

I'm not knocking C-130 - great aircraft and have spent many terrified hours in them waiting to jump out - but if we hadn't been obliged to buy them, what were the RAF planning on using as a para-dropping aircraft? The Belfast has no side doors and the rear door cannot be opened in flight - so unsuitably. So what was the RAF plan at the time?

[Jamie-Southend]

Interesting questions trim to which I don't know the answers despite working on the type in the early Heavylift days. Engineering that is not driving.

[bvcu]

HS681 VTOL 4 engined jet was cancelled and replaced with C130 with UK content. So assuming that it was para capable as replacing beverley/hastings ? anyone know more ?

[ICM]

The history doesn't back the C-130 theory, I'm afraid. As bvcu says, the RAF's C-130s were ordered in 1965, once the HS681 project was cancelled. The Belfast order for 10 aircraft was placed in 1960 and, of course, there was no airdrop requirement as part of that. Lots of this was covered in a Belfast thread in History/Nostalgia earlier this year.

For research on the Belfast, I could recommend C.H.Barnes' "Shorts Aircraft since 1900" which covers development and eventual disappointment at lack of commercial sales at some length.

[Flying Mechanic]

has the Belfast been scrapped? anyone got any pictures of the plane in Cairns?

[ErwinS]

Most recent I found
planes.cz - SC.5 Belfast - RP-C8020 - HeavyLift Cargo Airlines Australia ( HVY / HN ) - Cairns ( CNS / YBCS ) (http://www.planes.cz/en/photo/1135436/sc5-belfast-rp-c8020-heavylift-cargo-airlines-australia-hvy-hn-cairns-cns-ybcs/)

[mutt]

Link taken from another aviation site, says that it was taken early November 2012.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7276/8157217495_63f121a30a_c.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7261/8157214113_f26c100933_c.jpg

Mutt

[Double Hydco]

Isn't it odd that the've gone to all the trouble to remove any trace of the Heavylift Oz titles, if she is destined for the scrappers torch?

Fingers crossed "Foxtrot Tango" will find a good home.

DH

[NG_Kaptain]

Unlikely it will have any sort of life, an orphan with difficulties getting spares. A museum would probably be the best to expect rather than being scrapped.

[ErwinS]

Spares are no problem since they scrapped G-BEPS for that purpose and the engines from the CL-44-O.

[Double Hydco]

I thought the Guppy had "the wrong type" of Tyne for the Belfast?

[Mister.E]

I did hear the Guppy Tynes have been re-united with the Guppy. There appears to have been some work going on of late.

[brakedwell]

I have found a photograph of a C133 landing at Lajes in January or February 1958. I remember the stir it caused as it was the first time a C133 had landed there.
At the time I thought it didn't look right!

Apologies in advance for the poor quality of the picture. Blame my steam driven Voigtlander.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c32/sedgwickjames/C133-1.jpg

[JW411]

You might remember big Andy Wilson? Andy did an exchange tour with the USAF on C-133s (which he obviously survived, unlike many others).

I can always remember on our global trainer, one American ATC unit asked him what an SH5 was. Andy responded with the explanation that it was a bit like a C-133 only our one worked!

[brakedwell]

Yes Jock I do rember Andy.

[JW411]

Did you also know that Andy flew the Liberator, the Hastings and the Belfast with 53 Squadron?

[brakedwell]

I remember his name from my time on Hastings, before BZN.

[Hockham Admiral]

DH, the 'Guppy' Tynes don't have the water-meth injection which makes them pretty useless for the Belfast in any sort of hot/high conditions at T/O.

And I doubt any sort of CAA anywhere would look at those old Tynes without a complete rebuild.... and who can do that now?

[Shannon volmet]

DH, the 'Guppy' Tynes don't have the water-meth injection which makes them pretty useless for the Belfast in any sort of hot/high conditions at T/O.

The Tyne 515's from the Guppy are also air start as opposed to electric starter motors on the Belfast Tyne 12's. Also, different bearer mountings and many other things not compatible. I think Tyne engines are still in use by the Italian air force, so someone somewhere must still be able to rebuild them.

The Belfast was a great aircraft if you wanted to move a packet of RyVita from the UK to Mazira. Eff all range (900 miles) fully loaded. That's why they were all fitted with in flight refuelling probes, which Marshalls removed during the transfer mods for the civilian register.

[Dengue_Dude]

I only flew in a Belfast once, but we used to meet them a lot on the way through to and back from Singapore.

Under-powered crap I thought, but comfortable for the crew - and home to 3 snuggly-fitting Wessex I remember.

How you can build 10 aircraft in the same factory and have them all different is just beyond me . . .

[JW411]

Well, my record was Cold Lake, Alberta to Brize Norton (4303 nautical miles). It took us 13 hours and 30 minutes. I freely admit that we only had a 25,000 lbs load down the back.

My heaviest load was a complete building (right down to the toilet seats and a flag pole) from St Johns, Newfoundland up to Goose Bay, Labrador for the Canadian Department of Transport. (It was the only way to get the building there for the sea never did unfreeze that year). The weight of the building was just under 78,000 lbs.

The Belfast was never designed to carry general freight over long distances. That was what the CL-44 did. It was designed to move indivisible loads like two Puma helicopters or a Sea King. The 80 foot by 12 foot freight bay was the largest available at the time apart from the C-5A. There were no Antonov 124s available for hire in those days.

Most people who were critical of the Belfast never set foot on the bottom rung of the spiral staircase!

[ICM]

Other indivisible loads that come to mind were those made up of a mix of Abbott Self-Propelled Guns and FV 432 APCs to BAOR in late 1969; all in the 70,000 lb bracket with, as I recall, not exceeding Max Zero Fuel Weight as a planning consideration. And for awkward shaped support equipment on squadron deployments, for example, the aircraft's bulk capacity meant that one Belfast load would normally shift what otherwise needed two Hercs. It was a very handy aircraft in the inventory in its day.

[VP8]

Whilst stationed at RAF Wattisham in the mid 70's the Belfasts used to come in twice a year from Cyprus APC with Lightning missiles and would reverse taxy up the disused to Missile City!

Never thought I'd be working with it again 30 years later!!

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Hockham AdmiralAnd I doubt any sort of CAA anywhere would look at those old Tynes without a complete rebuild.... and who can do that now?
I believe M.T.U. still do it - for a price !!
Be lucky
David

[an-124]

Anyone have a contact for flying tiger oversize cargo?

[4 Holer]

Sydney phone +61 2 9546 5103

address
263 Connells Point Rd Connells Point NSW 2221 Australia:ugh:

[cherrick]

went to the website - they have 1 plane for sale? Not exactly a volume operation.

I was hoping for a DC3 with refurb'ed, modern P&W engines

[Stratofreighter]

The end is nigh for "Hector"....
Short Belfast status - Cairns Airport - Updated to Feb 2017 (http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?132129-Short-Belfast-status-Cairns-Airport-Updated-to-Feb-2017) :uhoh: :{ :(