talk on the Trident airliner at Brooklands 23 march

[rog747]

next Thursday evening at brooklands weybridge surrey is a talk on the trident by expert Neil lomax

23 march 1900

info for tickets https://www.brooklandsmuseum.com/btm/member-events/The-Trident-Airliner

[El Bunto]

Whilst the usual criticism levelled against DHA is their allegience to the Spey, thereby limiting the Trident's potential, I only recently discovered that the Spey was Boeing's original choice of engine for the 727!

However the proposed license-production deal with Allison fell-through because gov.uk declined to provide funding or permit certain technology transfer. As a result, Boeing was persuaded by its US customers to go with the JT8D, which was fatter and heavier but which had a US supply chain. And which of course eventually scaled-up to higher thrusts and left the Spey behind.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The Spey was fine for the Tridents 1 and 2, but wouldn't scale for the Trident 3. The criticism of dH is that they let BEA talk them out of the Medway engined dH 121 and instead build the ludicrously small 90 seat Trident 1 for which the Spey sufficed.

[Allan Lupton]

SSD is right that some of our senior management was weak-willed and as one of the clear-thinkers put it " . . . designed an internationally unwanted airliner with scaled-down engines that RR knew they could not sell elsewhere."
One of our partners in Airco was Hunting and if you remember they used the Spey when their twin-engined project became the BAC111. I think I remember Heinz Vogel telling me how redesigning it for Spey power was a classic all-nighter but I can't remember what engine it had before that.

ETA however we don't need to cover that old ground here. Go and hear about the aeroplane from someone who's involved now!

[rog747]

I'm going!

[treadigraph]

I can't remember what engine it had before that

Bristol Siddeley BS75 apparently.

[rog747]

i flew on many Tridents - mostly Northeast 1e's on charter to Swans Tours out of LHR usually at weekends in summer (Med) and winter (ski)

the sun pax went to milan turin pisa rimini venice palma ibiza mahon malaga gerona barcelona alicante
in high season sometimes relief flights would depart 15 minutes after the first one
overbookings were rife

the ski flight pax for Austria were flown to ZRH and MUC
never understood why we did not go to Salzburg which was a BEA destination too and closer to the Tirol
guess a Trident would never get into INN
Italy ski pax went to MXP and Turin

123 Y pax on the One E
the range was not that brilliant with that load - i think Malaga was about the limit or Malta although Channel AW did STN-LPA with 139Y - how i do not know but apparently a Channel AW Trident holds the record for the fastest flight time from London to the Canaries of just 3 hours 15 mins

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Channel_Airways_Hawker_Siddeley_HS-121_Trident_1E_AN2388412.jpg


flew LGW-Dubrovnk once subbing for BCAL Aug 1972 as they had lost a 1-11 at CFU in a RTO.

[Tu.114]

No thread on the Trident is complete without this picture:

http://www.shockcone.co.uk/hs121/trident/images/1ecabin.jpg

Apparently some airline found it wise to put a 7-abreast seating into the forward cabin of the airliner. I can only imagine the relief of the travellers when finally being allowed off this sardine can...

[arem]

Channel Airways - 140 seats

[Chris Scott]

Quote from rog747:
"flew LGW-Dubrovnk once subbing for BCAL Aug 1972 as they had lost a 1-11 at CFU in a RTO."

Talking of Corfu and BCAL's 1-11 over-run into shallow water following a rejected take-off there reminds me of one of my few visits there one summer's day, at about that period (early 1970s), on a BCAL passenger charter.

I was sitting alone completing the turnround checks when we had a visit from a friendly BEA Trident first-officer, who was interested to have a look in our spacious cockpit. (I don't remember which mark of Trident he was flying.)

During our conversation he asked how limited our weight would be for the Corfu departure. Having just laboriously calculated it from the graphs (as always), I had to tell him we were limited by around 15 tonnes, leaving an RTOW of about 127 tonnes (IIRC). Not a problem for the full charter-load of pax to Gatwick, however.

The BEA guy was impressed and not a little envious, as I think they were struggling to plan a direct return to LHR. No disrespect to the Trident, of course, which would have burned far less fuel per passenger-mile than ours. Simply the luxury of operating a short-haul flight with an over-powered, long-haul aeroplane, manufactured at Brooklands.

[Allan Lupton]

Bristol Siddeley BS75 apparently.
Thanks for reminding me!
I think there was also a Bristol aeroplane project with those engines arranged round a butterfly tail.

[rog747]

No thread on the Trident is complete without this picture:

http://www.shockcone.co.uk/hs121/trident/images/1ecabin.jpg

Apparently some airline found it wise to put a 7-abreast seating into the forward cabin of the airliner. I can only imagine the relief of the travellers when finally being allowed off this sardine can...

i actually sat in those seats at STN when the channel trident was open for public viewing on one Sunday afternoon when it was quite new

i was 11 or 12 so not huge but i was quite a big lad and mum dad and me tried out the 4 seater row - it was actually OK!

139 Ypax IIRC

[rog747]

Quote from rog747:
"flew LGW-Dubrovnk once subbing for BCAL Aug 1972 as they had lost a 1-11 at CFU in a RTO."

Talking of Corfu and BCAL's 1-11 over-run into shallow water following a rejected take-off there reminds me of one of my few visits there one summer's day, at about that period (early 1970s), on a BCAL passenger charter.

I was sitting alone completing the turnround checks when we had a visit from a friendly BEA Trident first-officer, who was interested to have a look in our spacious cockpit. (I don't remember which mark of Trident he was flying.)

During our conversation he asked how limited our weight would be for the Corfu departure. Having just laboriously calculated it from the graphs (as always), I had to tell him we were limited by around 15 tonnes, leaving an RTOW of about 127 tonnes (IIRC). Not a problem for the full charter-load of pax to Gatwick, however.

The BEA guy was impressed and not a little envious, as I think they were struggling to plan a direct return to LHR. No disrespect to the Trident, of course, which would have burned far less fuel per passenger-mile than ours. Simply the luxury of operating a short-haul flight with an over-powered, long-haul aeroplane, manufactured at Brooklands.

Chris
what were you flying out of CFU at 127 tonnes RTOW>? a VC10?

[DaveReidUK]

Chris
what were you flying out of CFU at 127 tonnes RTOW>? a VC10?

Tricky one ...

Simply the luxury of operating a short-haul flight with an over-powered, long-haul aeroplane, manufactured at Brooklands.

[rog747]

Tricky one ...

well yes - VC10's were used on BCAL charters to the Canaries, Nicosia and Rhodes but never knew one of them ever going into Corfu

when Northeast pranged a Trident one E at Bilbao (G-AVYD which was a w/off) the airline was short of lift and both STD and Super BA VC10's were used on Northeast holiday charters to Spain (1975)
i went to ALC on a super and AGP STD

[Chris Scott]

Hi rog747,

BCAL Standard VC10 Type 1103. Wot! Not enough hints? :rolleyes: (Apologies for the thread drift.) The Type 1103 had the "Super" chord extension and wing-tip L/E droop, enabling F/L430 when light enough. One of them is the one at Brooklands, donated by the Sultan of Oman.

The "Ten" burned about 5500-6000kg/hr in the cruise at medium weights.
I imagine the Tridents would have burned not much more than half that at a similar, or slightly higher Mach?
In those days (it was August 1971, so before the fuel crisis) we were cruising at a modest M0.835 (0.86 indicated). MMO was 0.86.

From what I heard the Trident was also faster in the climb and descent than the VC10. Our VMO was only 329 kt IAS at sea-level; slightly reducing higher up.

Quote:
" VC10's were used on BCAL charters to the Canaries, Nicosia and Rhodes but never knew one of them ever going into Corfu"

Never did Rhodes or Nicosia personally, and now see I only did CFU the once. LPA and TCI (Tenerife North, as it was coded in those days) were schedules, the former also used en-route GIG. I once did a charter from BOH to TCI with 150 pax at a time when the Hurn runway was only 6000 ft...

[dixi188]

I remember seeing a VC-10 at Hurn doing the Tenerife flight. I think it was due to a French or Spanish ATC strike and the usual 1-11 didn't have the range to take the oceanic route. ("Tango" route ??)
The 1-11 only had 119 seats and usually tech stopped outbound and sometimes inbound as well.

[rog747]

Hi rog747,

BCAL Standard VC10 Type 1103. Wot! Not enough hints? :rolleyes: (Apologies for the thread drift.) The Type 1103 had the "Super" chord extension and wing-tip L/E droop, enabling F/L430 when light enough. One of them is the one at Brooklands, donated by the Sultan of Oman.

The "Ten" burned about 5500-6000kg/hr in the cruise at medium weights.
I imagine the Tridents would have burned not much more than half that at a similar, or slightly higher Mach?
In those days (it was August 1971, so before the fuel crisis) we were cruising at a modest M0.835 (0.86 indicated). MMO was 0.86.

From what I heard the Trident was also faster in the climb and descent than the VC10. Our VMO was only 329 kt IAS at sea-level; slightly reducing higher up.

Quote:
" VC10's were used on BCAL charters to the Canaries, Nicosia and Rhodes but never knew one of them ever going into Corfu"

Never did Rhodes or Nicosia personally, and now see I only did CFU the once. LPA and TCI (Tenerife North, as it was coded in those days) were schedules, the former also used en-route GIG. I once did a charter from BOH to TCI with 150 pax at a time when the Hurn runway was only 6000 ft...

thanks for that!

i worked for horizon holidays around that time and they were a big BUA customer for their charters (then Cale//BUA) and recall the ops board showing VC10's we had going to the slightly further afield and to the posher destinations as you too also recall but Corfu was def a new one to me! cheers

[rog747]

I remember seeing a VC-10 at Hurn doing the Tenerife flight. I think it was due to a French or Spanish ATC strike and the usual 1-11 didn't have the range to take the oceanic route. ("Tango" route ??)
The 1-11 only had 119 seats and usually tech stopped outbound and sometimes inbound as well.


that would have been for Bath Travel Palmair i assume

[WHBM]

The criticism of dH is that they let BEA talk them out of the Medway engined dH 121 and instead build the ludicrously small 90 seat Trident 1 for which the Spey sufficed.
One must understand that in 1960. when the Trident was being designed, 90 seats was not small, but large, for BEA European services, these had commonly low load factors (60-70%) as it was with the Viscount which preceded them on many routes. The bigger Vanguard had sold on the basis of seat-mile costs, but the bums on seats to cover all those Vanguard seats just weren't there except on a few domestic trunk routes (which the Trident, initially, was not expected to cover).

The standard aircraft of the era for many of the BEA competitors into London was the Caravelle, which had less than 90 seats. With the pooling arrangements of the era with most other European flag carriers, the more seats your aircraft had, the less frequency you could do, needing to maintain a strict seating balance.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

That may be so WHBM, but the fact remains that dH planned for a lot more than 90 seats with their 121 as they were anticipating growing demand in the industry. You don't plan for 'now', you plan for the future.

As Boeing did with the tri jet that did take the world market.

[Chris Scott]

Would it be fair to suggest that Boeing plagiarised the rear-tri-jet concept from DH? (Answers on a postcard!)

rog747,
25/08/71 G-ASIW 0820 LGW/CFU 1105 // 1225 CFU/LGW 1535
06/08/73 G-ASIX 1100 LGW/RHO 1455 // 1550 RHO/LGW 1950
02/01/74 G-ASIW 1150 BOH/TCI 1530 // 1635 TCI/BOH 2005

[pax britanica]

Re the trident vs 727 I understood that Boeing did visit Dh but I doubt that the whole concept cme from their. More like the design parameters of the US majors which i think were on the lines of Dallas out of LGA or DCA leading to the extensive slat/flap system on the 727.

Also in general terms if you were going to scale down a plane from 707/DC8 size for short haul medium haul you would probably choose three engines as two were probably considered a bit risky or just didnt have the grunt and if you chose three engines you get one in the tail thus hight tail plane and therefore two aircraft that look alike.

Same with the IL62 VC2 need along hauiler got to have four engines . VC 10s needed a clean wing for hot and high empire routes , some of which visited basic places witha lot of FOD potential . IL62 long range , and Russias so big that can mean domestic and that can mean some rough airfields. either way no good having pod mounted engines on the wings to suck up rubbish so stick them on the tail in two pairs. Tail engines high tail so VC10and IL62 look a lot alike. DC9-1-11 etc so I think its the mission that makes the plane not copycatitng

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Same applies to Concorde and the TU144. The latter was dubbed 'Concordski' by the press inferring it was a Concorde copy. Shows what the press know!

A supersonic airliner requires a thin fuselage and highly swept thin delta wings, hence the superficial likeness of the two designs. However, there are two bits on Concorde that made it work as well as it did; the wing and the intakes (including the intake control system).

If the Russians had managed to copy those they would have had a winner on their hands!

[Allan Lupton]

Re the trident vs 727 I understood that Boeing did visit Dh but I doubt that the whole concept cme from their.
Yes Shirer (Boeing Chief Engineer) and his team were "shown all" at DH's and a fortnight later announced the 727. "in early 1960 Hatfield accepted a return visit to Boeings and were politely received and told nothing". (as above this is from a senior de Havilland executive closely involved at the time.)

ETA SSD is right that you don't plan for now but for the future, hence the A300 and A380 had considerable capacity increases over what existed and were ready to go into service when needed

[WHBM]

That may be so WHBM, but the fact remains that dH planned for a lot more than 90 seats with their 121 as they were anticipating growing demand in the industry. You don't plan for 'now', you plan for the future.

As Boeing did with the tri jet that did take the world market.
The typical seating config for the Boeing 727-100 in the 1960s for US carriers (the bulk of deliveries) was F10 Y85. So much the same. They put more in later by squeezing up the seats, but so did everyone else. That was the standard of the time. Dan-Air had to install extra overwing exits when they put them into IT service.

[rog747]

rog747,
25/08/71 G-ASIW 0820 LGW/CFU 1105 // 1225 CFU/LGW 1535
06/08/73 G-ASIX 1100 LGW/RHO 1455 // 1550 RHO/LGW 1950
02/01/74 G-ASIW 1150 BOH/TCI 1530 // 1635 TCI/BOH 2005[/QUOTE]

thanks Chris
such civilised flight times - how simply lovely

BTW re RHO would you have flown in to Rhodes old airbase Maritsa now closed
the airfield behind and between the mountains ?

[rog747]

The typical seating config for the Boeing 727-100 in the 1960s for US carriers (the bulk of deliveries) was F10 Y85. So much the same. They put more in later by squeezing up the seats, but so did everyone else. That was the standard of the time. Dan-Air had to install extra overwing exits when they put them into IT service.

yes Dan Air added 2 extra type 1 rear doors to enable upto 150 pax on their 727-100's
they actually put in 146 Y but it was a squeeze for pax
the range enabled MAN-TFS at least

Channel AW got 139 in their One E's but STN or Berlin to LPA must have been a struggle

[A30yoyo]

The final indignity was the re-engine program for 50 UPS geriatric 727-100 freighters with Rolls-Royce Tay engines

[blind pew]

Chris VMO on the Trident was 365 knots.
The Trident 1s were reengined as it couldn't get airborne from Heathrow with a full load in summer...hence the nickname "gripper". (Ground gripper...got airborne due to the curvature of the earth).
Whilst the Trident did set records...some courtesy of pulling a certain circuit breaker as the overspeed siren would give one a headache..

The VC 10 also set a subsonic trans Atlantic record which stands today.

Biggest problem with the Trident was the way we flew it because many "couldn't".

The Iron Duck was a different kettle of fish and a real gentlemans aircraft.

[WHBM]

Channel AW got 139 in their One E's but STN or Berlin to LPA must have been a struggle
Channel got very little use from their Tridents, which must have lost them a lot of money. Having ordered five, they only took delivery of two, the others having to be sold off cheaply by Hawker Siddeley as standing stock to BKS and Air Ceylon. The only mainstream contract they got was one aircraft based at Berlin in summer only. HS were sufficiently unimpressed with Channel that it was "cash with order" for spares, and the second aircraft spent at least one summer season standing at Stansted being robbed for parts to keep the Berlin one going. Apart from this use, they just picked up odd subcharters and the like around the place, and for the large Lyons Tours contract they got, which the Tridents had originally been ordered for, they bought the old Olympic Airways Comet 4B fleet, at scrap prices, instead.

[Alan Baker]

Yes Shirer (Boeing Chief Engineer) and his team were "shown all" at DH's and a fortnight later announced the 727. "in early 1960 Hatfield accepted a return visit to Boeings and were politely received and told nothing". (as above this is from a senior de Havilland executive closely involved at the time.)

ETA SSD is right that you don't plan for now but for the future, hence the A300 and A380 had considerable capacity increases over what existed and were ready to go into service when needed



The old chestnut that Boeing copied de Havilland really needs to be put to bed. The idea that mighty Boeing, with nearly ten years experience of churning out hundreds of big jets, needed to learn anything from puny de Havilland, who's experience of (not very) big jets was producing a hundred or so Comets, is laughable. DH was a cottage industry compared to Boeing and the UK government knew it, hence the encouragement to merge the various British manufacturers into two groups.

[WHBM]

The idea that mighty Boeing, with nearly ten years experience of churning out hundreds of big jets, needed to learn anything from puny de Havilland, who's experience of (not very) big jets was producing a hundred or so Comets, is laughable. DH was a cottage industry compared to Boeing.
Ah yes, what could DH have shown Boeing ?



First jet airliner orders in the world (unlike Boeing)
First jet airliner into service in the world (unlike Boeing)
First jet airliner engines in the world (Boeing didn't do engines, let alone jets).
After the Comer 1 failures, still managed to get their next jet airliner into service first again (unlike Boeing).
A WW2 bomber that could carry the same payload as a B17 to Berlin, yet flew higher away from the flak, faster so it outran the fighters, and could drop down to deliver this at precision rooftop low level so it actually hit something meaningful.

What indeed ?

[DaveReidUK]

Shirer (Boeing Chief Engineer) and his team were "shown all" at DH's and a fortnight later announced the 727

I can't believe that anyone seriously thinks the launch of the 727 was a consequence of a visit to Hatfield a couple of weeks earlier.

[blind pew]

Don't know the truth about the 727 copying the HS121 but the autoland system was pinched from smiths as one of the development engineers suddenly quit and got a job stateside.

[chevvron]

Don't know the truth about the 727 copying the HS121 but the autoland system was pinched from smiths as one of the development engineers suddenly quit and got a job stateside.

And it was test flown on a DH Comet, XV 814. The crew (Capt was the great Ken Mills) proudly pointed it out to me the first time I flew in it.

[chevvron]

Ah yes, what could DH have shown Boeing ?



First jet airliner orders in the world (unlike Boeing)
First jet airliner into service in the world (unlike Boeing)
First jet airliner engines in the world (Boeing didn't do engines, let alone jets).
After the Comer 1 failures, still managed to get their next jet airliner into service first again (unlike Boeing).
A WW2 bomber that could carry the same payload as a B17 to Berlin, yet flew higher away from the flak, faster so it outran the fighters, and could drop down to deliver this at precision rooftop low level so it actually hit something meaningful.

What indeed ?

I suppose the B47 was the first 'big jet' produced by Boeing; first flew 17 Dec 1947. Comet first flight was 27 Jul 1949. Not quite 10 years eh?

[WHBM]

I suppose the B47 was the first 'big jet' produced by Boeing; first flew 17 Dec 1947. Comet first flight was 27 Jul 1949. Not quite 10 years eh?
Was the B47 not a military bomber, whereas the Comet 1, Comet 4 and 727 were passenger airliners (De Havilland had built their first military jet in 1943).

[Captain Dart]

The B-47 set the standard for large swept-wing jet aircraft fitted with podded engines on the wings. The twisting moment of the swept wing and aeroelastic effects were balanced by the weight of the forward swept podded engines. This reduced weight and increased the wing efficiency.

All modern jet airliners that do not have rear mounted engines owe their success to the revolutionary B-47. The Comet configuration, while first, went nowhere.

[Alan Baker]

Ah yes, what could DH have shown Boeing ?



First jet airliner orders in the world (unlike Boeing)
First jet airliner into service in the world (unlike Boeing)
First jet airliner engines in the world (Boeing didn't do engines, let alone jets).
After the Comer 1 failures, still managed to get their next jet airliner into service first again (unlike Boeing).
A WW2 bomber that could carry the same payload as a B17 to Berlin, yet flew higher away from the flak, faster so it outran the fighters, and could drop down to deliver this at precision rooftop low level so it actually hit something meaningful.

What indeed ?



Ah, de Havilland! That giant of 21st century aerospace............

[chevvron]

Was the B47 not a military bomber, whereas the Comet 1, Comet 4 and 727 were passenger airliners (De Havilland had built their first military jet in 1943).
I was talking of 'big jets' in general ie not single or twin engined fighters but bombers/airliners.
Lets face it, the B45 was more 'Comet' like and it flew before the B47 on 17 Mar 1947.

[India Four Two]

At the risk of being accused of thread drift, how was the talk? ;)

PS I'm going to be in London this weekend. Friday to Tuesday. Anything aeronautical happening that I could take in?

[rog747]

great talk - twas rather long for Neil to do it all without a tea break in a packed hot room but thoroughly interesting and some great pics - no snoozers LOL