IL-62 question

[MARK9263]

Could anyone explain the 'slope' on the tail??

[Capetonian]

A certain Mr. Clarkson got into a lot of trouble for using that word.

'Angle' might be a better word.

[MARK9263]

Sorry, there should be a photo there!

Am puzzled how to make it appear!

[Capetonian]

http://vliegtuighomepage.nl/il62su.jpg

That shows it clearly.

[MARK9263]

That's great! Many thanks.

Yourself or anyone explain the 'angle' ??

[Groundloop]

It's an all-flying tailplane. It isn't always in that position:-

Photos: Ilyushin Il-62M Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Aeroflot/Ilyushin-Il-62M/2564442/L/&sid=870401cbeb568d9cd9fb7633913a8715)

[MARK9263]

I notice it only seems to be at that position whilst taxying?

[John Farley]

There are very many reasons why a pilot might choose to pull the controls back when on the ground.

[joy ride]

Like the VC 10, it's a beautiful machine. I assume that if you are designing airliners with 4 rear-mounted engines and a T Tail there are bound to be similarities. With these two were the similarities purely a coincidence of the fundamental design, or partly through industrial espionage as with Concorde/Tu 144?

[Tu.114]

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/5/0/4/0249405.jpg

To me, this does not look like an all-flying tail. Rather like a conventional elevator on a variable incidence tailplane as is standard on transonic airliners.

The picture that was posted by the thread starter rather looks like an extremely nose-up trim setting.

[philbky]

TU114 if you are right those are the smallest elevators ever in relation to the size of aircraft!

[DaveReidUK]

To me, this does not look like an all-flying tail. Rather like a conventional elevator on a variable incidence tailplaneCorrect. In fact the elevator, like all the other flying control surfaces on the Il-62, is manually powered via servo tabs.

[kcockayne]

joy ride

Largely industrial espionage, I believe.

[joy ride]

Thanks, by "them" on "us" I presume; by "us" I understand that we did have post-WW2 technical "help" from German sources!

[Capetonian]

The Ilyushin 62 / VC10ski was a beautiful aircraft. That picture of the LOT aircraft brings back memories.

[Allan Lupton]

Quote
In fact the elevator, like all the other flying control surfaces on the Il-62, is manually powered via servo tabs.

The running joke in period was that the five-man flight crew was needed to power the manual controls. We thought of it as a coxed four, with four pilots and a commissar who would instruct them when to "heave"

[joy ride]

Do I take it that, like "Concordski" this "copy" might have been bigger and had a greater range but was less advanced technically? Pretty sure I know the answer, just want to be certain!

[Tu.114]

Well, the Ilyushin shares the overall configuration with the VC-10, but aerodynamically and technically, the two types are rather different. To begin with, the fuselage has a circular cross-section on the Ilyushin vs. the double-bubble on the VC-10. The wings are not nearly similar either; compare the elaborate system on the VC-10 with the more simple single-slotted flaps and the sawtooth instead of the slats on the Ilyushin. In fact, in Interflug service the Ilyushin was noted for its rather high approach speed - not really a sign of a "hot and high" craft like the VC-10. Other external details like the only slightly swept tailfin and more rectangular horizontal stabilizer of the Ilyushin vs. the whale fluke of the VC-10 do not point to a carbon copy either. Neither does the retractable tail wheel on the Ilyushin - the engineers at Vickers apparently saw no problem with tail tipping during loading and offloading unlike their Soviet colleagues.

Navigation system wise, the Il-62 seemed to struggle with the low-tech I-11 INS equipment (coming from Soviet nuclear subs!) that not only is said to have taken ages to erect, but also required loading and boarding to wait until the INS was up and running. For North Atlantic routes, Interflug used CMA-771 Omega navigation devices bought from the Canadian class enemy, because the INS could not provide the required accuracy. As only a few of these units were available, they were rotated between aircraft as needed.

And I also have not heard about the VC-10 being plagued with the Conways not reaching their advertised TBOs unlike especially the NK-8 on the non-M Ilyushins. LOT had to find out the hard way that there is a reason why a NK8 should not be on the wing respective tail for too long.

But nevertheless, and here I better don my asbestos suit against the inevitable flames, I think the Il-62 surpasses the VC-10 a little bit in elegance and good looks.

[joy ride]

Thanks Tu! The "whale fluke" tail is what decides the matter for me (just) looks-wise!

Clearly there are differences in styling, but also the 10 was intended for "hot and high" routes which needed particular characteristics.

[pax britanica]

Interesting thread.
in my spotting days the 62 was always a favourite-a very good looking aircraft and some nice colour schemes -especially the Czech OK jets . A very cool spool up noise to prior to take off . Mind you the VC ten-especially the super also looked great with nose down stance and the howl building to thunder of the four conways .

I was lucky enough to fly on a 62, mildly anxious because of the exploding NK turbo fans, on a trip from London to Prague in the early 70s. Nicely furnished interior , nice crew , free wonderful Czech beer just after take off. A quiet relaxing plane to travel in as indeed the VC 10 was .

of course back in the day LHR had a wonderful selection of aircraft types on any given day which design advances and consolidation have caused to vanish so that essentially we live in a world of 737 -200s with ever increasing lengths and ever fatter engines. technological marvels but a bit boring.

I cannot recall seeing a LOT 62 but Aeroflot and CSA yes , and being thrilled to run into an Interflug example doing a charter to Paris, best of all a North Korean State transport at Arlanda and most recently-though a few years back a Russian State at LHR.. Did anyone other than the three mentioned operate into LHR-

[Capetonian]

I remember seeing an IL-62 take off from Santiago de Chile, I think the routing was SCL - HAV - SNN - STO - MOW. A very noisy but graceful machine.

[SpringHeeledJack]

Aeroflot, CSA, LOT, Malev, possibly United Arab Airlines back in the day and a few VIP examples China, Russia, East Germany all seen at LHR over the years. A great aircraft and the odd time one of the Rossiya examples pays a visit these days it's a thrill.

I believe at one point in the late 80's/early 90's Shannon had more IL62's transiting than all the other European airports combined. Didn't the Irish have some deal with Russia/Aeroflot to maintain/service aircraft doing the long haul between Moscow and Havana etc ?

[DaveReidUK]

Malev only operated a single Il-62 (on lease from CSA) for a few months in 1991. I'm not sure it ever got to LHR.

[Art Smass]

Tarom used Il-62's to LHR - I logged YR-IRE there on 26 Aug 84

[philbky]

When increasing range saw most flights across the Atlantic overflying Shannon instead of calling for fuel the airport went into something of a decline. By the late 1970s this was becoming a serious problem.

The USSR was expanding its links with countries in Central and South America but its aircraft didn' t have the range to fly from Russia to Cuba (the nearest friendly country). Shannon had been used as a stopover but Gander had cheaper fuel and the IL62M just about had the range.

This hurt Shannon so a scheme was hatched whereby Soviet fuel would be delivered to Shannon and stored for Aeroflot's use. 1.25 million gallons was delivered on 11 June 1980 and the first refuelling was on July 3. All ground handling was by Aer Rianta.

By the mid 1980s over 3000 flights a year were being handled with Aeroflot getting "free" fuel insofar as the fuel came from its government allocated supplies rather than having to buy it at market prices and Aer Rianta was gaining revenue from ground handling and catering.

Aer Rianta then bartered landing fees against some of the fuel and, with a massive price advantage over other airports, attracted regular charter traffic refuelling from TWA, Rich International, American Trans Air, Worldways and Tarom.

[SpringHeeledJack]

Tarom used Il-62's to LHR - I logged YR-IRE there on 26 Aug 84

Ah, yes…..Tarom! Also used to love their IL18's that smoked their way into various airports. I'm sure that I saw the Malev IL62 at LHR, but perhaps it was FRA or JFK and I'm confusing myself :)

I think you might need to resize that 'tiny' photo mr janetflight :}

Are Rianta…..do they still exist ?

[WHBM]

I believe at one point in the late 80's/early 90's Shannon had more IL62's transiting than all the other European airports combined. Didn't the Irish have some deal with Russia/Aeroflot to maintain/service aircraft doing the long haul between Moscow and Havana etc

The Shannon arrangement was much more substantial than just a maintenance deal. Aeroflot not only needed a refuelling point well on the way from Moscow to Havana, but also had the issue of needing to pay for all that fuel in western currency. They struck a deal with Shannon to actually build a tank farm which was theirs, supplied with Soviet jet fuel, which came round from the Black Sea by tanker periodically. Once up and running, other operators also were able to take advantage of (slightly) reduced prices for this, but paid in US dollars. There were initial concerns about quality, but it was soon found that Soviet refinery fuel was fully up to Jet A-1 spec. Ireland, having no domestic refinery business to support, didn't mind at all, of course. So yes, Shannon did handle more transits than anywhere else.

Among other aircraft were the Cubana domestic Antonov 24s, which all needed to come back to the factory at Kiev every few years for a D-check. This was a challenging operation for a smaller aircraft, routing (as I understand it) from Havana via Nassau, Bermuda, Yarmouth Nova Scotia, Gander, Keflavik, Shannon, Prague and Kiev. Went on for years. They never lost one in the transit.

The IL-62, even the M variant, did not have the range to do anything like Moscow to Havana nonstop, but its predecessor on the route, the big contra-rotating turboprop Il-114, started such flights around the time of the Cuban missile crisis, and were picked off at their various refuelling points by the US government applying extreme pressure on local governments along the way. After a couple of changes, including some points in west Africa, the 114 routed north from Moscow to Murmansk, thence nonstop over the ocean. Has to be the longest propeller aircraft sector of all time, about 16 hours. I understand they could only take half the passenger load, plus minimal baggage.

[Tu.114]

That must have been quite a journey.

http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/complete/su64/su64-5.jpg

In approximately the middle of this page, it reads 19h40min for the flight from SVO to HAV - presumably with the tech stop in Murmansk.

[WHBM]

Aer Rianta…..do they still exist ?
Yes indeed. Not only do they run the major Irish airports, but from being pioneers in the duty-free business they have various overseas interests, and doubtless arising from contacts made in those days the duty free outlet at St Petersburg airport has long been a joint venture between Russian interests and Aer Rianta, trading as "Lenrianta", and the shopping bags are branded as such. I've never noticed if this applies to any of the Moscow airports.



http://bs-adviser.ru/en/klientyi/lenrianta.html

[Pali]

I remember particular night flight from Prague to Cairo in January 1984 with IL-62. When I watched to the east I saw flashes on the horizon which seemed to me as an artillery fire in Lebanon at the time.
My parents (who worked at embassy in Cairo) remember a stressful take off from Beirut on an IL-62 under mortar fire. CSA was one of the last carriers which utilised that airport.

IL-62 was a magnificent airplane especially when I compare it with IL-18 which was rather standard for us at the given time.

[WHBM]

I'm always surprised at those who say the Il-62 was a copy of the VC-10, Tu154 was a copy of the Trident (or 727 - take your pick), but never say that the DC8 "must have been" an espionage copy of the 707, DC9 "must have stolen the One-Eleven drawings", and similar.

Fact is that for a four-engine long haul jet aircraft, there are only a limited number of options. Engines closer to the centreline gives less chance of an engine failure getting out of control, as 707/DC8 operators, especially on training flights, found out only too well. The Soviets never did a jet with wing-mounted engines until the Ilyushin 86 widebody came along in the late 1970s, so going for fuselage mounted engines should not have been that much of a surprise.

[Ant]

Can't resist this little ditty which might possibly have been on Pprune sometime in the past:

I thought I saw a VC10
But it was just an optical Ilyushin!

[kkbuk]

I remember seeing a VC10ski landing at Paya Lebah airport in Singapore sometime in 1973 and was struck by the sheer noise of the beast both on landing and take-off when compared by the comparative quietness of a British Caledonia VC10 flight landing 15 minutes later.

[El Bunto]

the engineers at Vickers apparently saw no problem with tail tipping during loading and offloading unlike their Soviet colleagues.Partly because the Il-62 has its wing mounted farther forward, so is more prone to tipping. The trade-off being a significantly small tail and lower cruising drag ( which it needed to compensate for the eingines, I suppose! )

Even the initial Il-62 with the NK-8s engines wasn't a slouch; despite the simple wing it gave DC-8-6x weights out of a runway shorter than that aircraft or a 707-320B, falling neatly between those types and the lighter-still Super VC-10.

Edit: oblig. Flight data tables, from back in the day when they published useful stuff like this
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1969/1969%20-%203230.html

[El Bunto]

Per Jörg Thiel's book on the type, range of tailplane travel for trimming was from -1 to -10 degrees. Could be used for take-off and cruise.

Additionally the elevators had trim-tabs but he doesn't clarify which was the primary timmer ( I assume the overall tailplane ).

Interestingly some Il-62s had a rear ventral escape hatch, which you can just see in some photos on the starboard side under the engines. Also illustrated on some safety cards such as the IDG Airlines one here:

http://my-safetycard.de/pics/thumbs/15428.jpg
(http://my-safetycard.de/pics/thumbs/15428.jpg)

as exit E

[Dr Jekyll]

Partly because the Il-62 has its wing mounted farther forward, so is more prone to tipping. The trade-off being a significantly small tail and lower cruising drag

I always assumed the huge tail of the VC10 and the rearward wing position were both because the centre of gravity was so far back, rather than the tail size being required due to the wing position itself. But if the IL62 had a forward C of G presumably it wouldn't tend to tip backwards. What am I missing?

[Farrell]

Had three or four IL-76s on a daily basis flying a few hundred yards off my balcony in 2009 / 2010 out of Muscat.

Will dig out a video later on.

In the meantime, this is one of my favorites:

dPFmPJ0mi8M