VC10 quickie

[Jackonicko]

Could a VC10 (C1) use a 6,594 ft runway at all?

What limitations would be imposed?

[Cornish Jack]

Wisley Airfield Direction Length ft m 10/28 6,200 1,900 - (Source Wikipedia)

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Belize 1981: 6000ft exactly from memory, +35C, high humidity - no issues I was aware of, except turning around with no turning circles.

[xtp]

VC10 landing at Brooklands might qualify as the shortest..
See near the end of The 1st and last VC10 flight (http://www.vc10.net/Memories/A4OAB_Royalflight.html)

[Jackonicko]

Thanks chaps, that answers my question admirably, and with some entertainment value, too.

Though Belize is 9,678 ft long!

[Jhieminga]

Wisley Airfield Direction Length ft m 10/28 6,200 1,900 - (Source Wikipedia)
VC10s were restricted to 266,000 lbs MTOM at Wisley, according to someone who worked there in 1962.

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Thanks chaps, that answers my question admirably, and with some entertainment value, too.

Though Belize is 9,678 ft long!

It is now - it wasn't then! (I was OC Butcher Radar at the time)

(Check Google Earth - poor quality image from 1970 shows the basic runway outline; measure facility shows roughly 6000ft)

[Wycombe]

Could a VC10 (C1) use a 6,594 ft runway at all?

Granted this was probably operating very light, but here's some VC10 porn from Biggin Hill, UK VC10 at Biggin 2010
- runway length just under 6000ft

I've also heard it said that there was definitely one (and maybe a few more) trips to Jersey in around '87/88, which is a bit shorter still at 5,600ft.

[Hot 'n' High]

VC10 landing at Brooklands might qualify as the shortest..
See near the end of The 1st and last VC10 flight (http://www.vc10.net/Memories/A4OAB_Royalflight.html)


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1058x595/landing_9475fe8dd81194ae193af9e50a963a3154f390e7.gif
Wow!!!! :eek:

But, would a VC10 even fit between the white lines let alone land between them as suggested above????

Just askin'! H 'n' H

[Saint-Ex]

We flew in and out of Brooklands at 1,200 yds.

[nipva]

In the 90's they were serviced at St Athan whose runway was 5988'. They would of course have been empty apart ffrom minimum fuel.

[Saint-Ex]

We flew in and out of Brooklands at 1,200 yds. Always landed towards the railway and had the occasional smokey brakes.

[Jhieminga]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1058x595/landing_9475fe8dd81194ae193af9e50a963a3154f390e7.gif
Wow!!!! :eek:

But, would a VC10 even fit between the white lines let alone land between them as suggested above????

Just askin'! H 'n' H
Allright, I should have said 'the aim was to touch down between the white lines'.... but most visitors to my site won't be able to tell the difference ;)

[pax britanica]

Were all VC10s and SV10s built at Weybridge/Brooklands or just some? Presumably they were then flown with ultra minimum fuel to Wisley just five miles away as crow but not a VC10 flies , (probaly at least 30 miles by airliner) for the flight test programmes aside of course from heavy weight T/O hot and high etc. Of course as we all know and indeed love the fact that the VC10 was probably the loudest airliner ever made on the outside and with the short runways at both fields they created a huge amount of noise in very very Nimbyish areas -St Georges Hill for example is in between the two locations.

I was lucky enough to see the first VC10 landing at LHR and a very fine sight it was too especially with that weird low whine it made when taxying

[Hot 'n' High]

Allright, I should have said 'the aim was to touch down between the white lines'.... but most visitors to my site won't be able to tell the difference ;)

Aw, then you'd have deprived me of being able to spend a bit of time not being bored during "social distancing" and "internment" to send that Post!!!!! :p

Seriously, I volunteered a bit at Brooklands some years ago and was most impressed with the VC10 and the whole concept of flying stuff in and out of there. Didn't the Vanguard come in after the runway had been bisected by a road? Love the bit in the link that mentions that with brake failure they'd have hit the railway at 43 kts. I'd not heard the story as it was told on VC10.net - quite a story of how an airframe keeps on cropping up in someones life. That's what's nice about this aviation stuff, the affinity we can have with some Dural. Will composites have the same affinity? :O Time will tell!

Cheers, H 'n' H

[Jhieminga]

Correct, all built at Brooklands and all flown from Brooklands to Wisley on its first flight. The prototype's first flight was actually planned to go to Boscombe Down, but Jock Bryce decided on Wisley during the flight (see here (https://www.vc10.net/Memories/Bryce_firstflight.html)).

[NutLoose]

Allright, I should have said 'the aim was to touch down between the white lines'.... but most visitors to my site won't be able to tell the difference ;)

I bet sparks flew when he took that photo.

[qwertyuiop]

I’m surprised BEagle hasn’t given some figures yet. Lightweight it was a rocket ship (think lightweight 757),less so at max weight.

[Jhieminga]

Didn't the Vanguard come in after the runway had been bisected by a road?
Have a look at Andy Lambert's video for that story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmakSwlYLs0 They got lucky....

I've gone and changed the caption now, sorry about that :p VC10s were flown back to Brooklands with some regularity during the years when they were built there, but by the time of A4O-AB's return, it hadn't been done for years. Also, the test pilots with that experience were not current on the type anymore. I've got another good story about one of those earlier return flights here (https://www.vc10.net/Memories/FlightTesting.html#TestPilots).

[thunderbird7]

From a recent visit to Brooklands.. the aircraft were assembled on the west side, then taxied across and round the loop on the north east end of the runway, actually taking a running start to the take-off roll on the taxiway, slightly out of line with the runway. This gave a little extra for the take-off roll of the unfinished (internally) aircraft which was then completed at Wisley.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x559/1291085_0fb13f445216a5f39163e903a7e05137_d3fe121e4380005c94d bec51de4e908d31c43d1c.jpg

[rog747]

BUA flew in and out of Ndola - I think that was quite short

[taxydual]

Ah, and there's me thinking you were referring to the RAF Fireman who managed to do the dirty deed with a WRAF Air Stewardess during a turnround at Gan. Early '70's ISTR.

[Hot 'n' High]

Have a look at Andy Lambert's video for that story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmakSwlYLs0 They got lucky....

Blimey Jhieminga, I do now remember someone explained that but that was close with the tree hole! That could have gone nasty quickly!!!! Ugh!

Re VC10.net, what a great site! Been in there for ages now - so many amazing stories! The best so far is the "Stilton-eating vacuum cleaner!". Only a bl**dy Engineer ....... erm, says another ex-Engineer!!!! I was crying my eyes out imagining the scene unfolding as it munched it's way through the contents of the cockpit!!!! Brilliant! Cheers for the site!!! :ok: H 'n' H

[Herod]

From H 'n' H.....Will composites have the same affinity? Short answer; nope. Long answer; not a cat in h*ll's chance

[Jhieminga]

Ah, and there's me thinking you were referring to the RAF Fireman who managed to do the dirty deed with a WRAF Air Stewardess during a turnround at Gan. Early '70's ISTR.
One part of me is thinking: that might be an interesting story to add to my site. Another part is thinking: would I have to put an Adult rating on the site.... ;)

[pettinger93]

When the VC10s were being tested at Wisley, the rviolently attled the windows of our house in Cobham, several miles away.

[wub]

Ah, and there's me thinking you were referring to the RAF Fireman who managed to do the dirty deed with a WRAF Air Stewardess during a turnround at Gan. Early '70's ISTR.

colloquially known on Gan as Air Loadmattresses

[Jetset 88]

Hello jackoniko,
I've been looking through all the posts re your query about a VC10 landing on 6594 runway.
The answer is most definitely yes as my chum Jheiminga has stated. (He runs the magnificent vc10.net website which is the definitive answer to everything VC10).

I was the one who flew the Sultan of Oman's Royal Flight VC10 A4O-AB into the Brooklands Museum in July 1987. The runway gets shorter every time I'm asked to tell the tale about how long the Brooklands runway actually was!
Give or take a bit for my memory lapse after some 33 years, it was betwen 3,300 ft and 3,500 ft.
As a minor digression I would add that prior to VC10s in the RAF I was a QFI flying Bulldogs. One annual task that came my way three years running was the training of a student to represent our squadron in the annual Spot Landing competition. We won it each year. At Brooklands we were ultra light with minimal fuel, having only flown from Heathrow via Lasham and Farnborough that day and had just a couple of pax on board, so we were virtually empty.
We had the lines painted the week before and the aim was to Spot-Land our touch down between the two. In the event the rear bogies straddled the first line and, using full reverse thrust with relatively light braking, we actually had to put power on again reach the turn off taxiway in a dignified way at the far end of the runway.
The Byfleet Council had kindly cut down a few trees immediately at the threshold of the runway for our landing from south to north over the M25, the horribly brown-painted electricity pylons which were very difficult to see which we passed at about 600ft just to the south of the airfield. Contrary to some texts about my exploits which I have seen, we did NOT land over the railway line from north to south nor was the M25 closed either. It was all very dignified and totally non-hairy.
The runway length required for landing any aircraft depends on many factors such as airfield elevation (this affects the ground speed over the threshold when flying at the normal approach indicated airspeed since at higher airfield elevations amsl, the G/S is higher than at sea level.). Other factors such as weight and temperature, runway slope and wind velocity all come into the equation. Peformance A landing requirements for planning a landing assume that only idle reverse thrust is used but full braking is applied. It also assumes that all the flaps speedbrakes and are working normally. However we did actually use full reverse thrust and relatively light footbraking to avoid the brakes getting hot and the tyres then going bang half an hour after shutting down which would have been embarrassing on a day when we were in the 'limelight'.
Don't ask me more tech stuff because now 15 years into retirement, my brain has now stopped. Now, how long did I say the runway was?

[Dan Winterland]

The RAF deep maintenance for the VC10 was done at St Athan (5996ft) which presented no problems. BEagle and I landed a K2 there in 2000 and managed to turn off before the intersection which was less than 3000ft in the direction we landed. Obviously, depending on weight and temperature there would be some take off restrictions, but the Ten was designed for such runways.

[Jhieminga]

AFAIK the runway at Brooklands was 4380 feet long, and that is including the angled bit at the end. Without that added bit it was 3780 feet (about 1200 yards as Saint-ex mentioned) but by the time A4O-AB landed there, they could not touch down on the extreme threshold, so that probably accounts for a couple of hundred feet less as well.

[mcdhu]

The Duke of Windsor's body was flown from Paris to RAF Benson (then RW20, 6000') in June 1972 in a VC10.

mcdhu

[BEagle]

The RAF deep maintenance for the VC10 was done at St Athan (5996ft) which presented no problems. BEagle and I landed a K2 there in 2000 and managed to turn off before the intersection which was less than 3000ft in the direction we landed. Obviously, depending on weight and temperature there would be some take off restrictions, but the Ten was designed for such runways.

Indeed we did, Dan! It was when we took ZA144 on its last flight to be scrapped. I seem to recall that there was some limitation on the southern taxiway, so a short landing was preferable. Your prompt spoilers, idle then full reverse certainly helped us to stop - whilst I was getting drenched in some water which had gathered in the roof panel or whatever!

A 20 min flight, followed by a slow trip home in an uncomfortable white van along the M4 via Swindon.... I recall we discussed the opportunities which biz jet flying might offer?

[Trumpet trousers]

It was when we took ZA144 on its last flight to be scrapped
So if you had porked it up, you’d have saved the scrap merchant a job! 👍🏻

[NutLoose]

One part of me is thinking: that might be an interesting story to add to my site. Another part is thinking: would I have to put an Adult rating on the site.... ;)

I was asked to pop and stow the intake blanks in the forward hold, so dropped down the hatch in galley, stowed them and popped back up to find myself between the legs of the attractive air loadmasters who was standing astride the hatch, much to the amusement of the other guys who she was making drinks for.. a subtle cough and a bright red young lady moved.

[West Coast]

Know little about the aircraft. Would imagine it would be a handful (footfull?) with both out on one side. Anyone have any experience in training or line flying with that?

[ExAscoteer2]

Engines inboard at the tail. I seriously doubt assymetric was anything like as bad as Albert on 2!

Hell I doubt it was as bad as a Jetstream on 1!

[NutLoose]

Shame they never stuck a couple of RB211’s or similar on the backend as an update.

[sharpend]

Could a VC10 (C1) use a 6,594 ft runway at all?

What limitations would be imposed?

Yes, I have. Good example Exeter is 2037m (I think it was a bit shorter when I landed my VC10 on it), We took off empty and went up like a love-sick angel. How much runway was needed was calculated from the ODM (Operating Data Manual).

[Martin the Martian]

Looking at that plan of Brooklands it must have been quite interesting driving along the Woking road when a VC10 was getting airborne.

[Union Jack]

Yes, I have. Good example Exeter is 2037m (I think it was a bit shorter when I landed my VC10 on it), We took off empty and went up like a love-sick angel. How much runway was needed was calculated from the ODM (Operating Data Manual).

Presumably faster than a homesick angel!

Jack

[BEagle]

West Coast, we often practised 2-eng failures in the simulator - the first at V1 and the second (on the same side) a little later. This was at MOTW and provided that the double engine failure drill and subsequent clean up were carried out correctly, a positive rate of climb could be achieved. Once at a safe speed, the loss of systems actions were briefed and the plan for return was made, with the co-pilot flying for much of the pattern using the serviceable autopilot, then the captain took over for the approach. The aircraft flew just fine and the exercise often included a 2-eng go-around. Before we had a decent simulator, the procedure was practised in the aircraft, but not at MTOW! At least we just retarded the throttles to idle, unlike BOAC whose instructors would close the HP cocks!

All student captains flew a 2-eng approach and go-around plus a 2-eng visual circuit and landing during conversion training, but only with an instructor and at relatively light weight. I don't recall any of my students having any problems - in fact the aircraft was much easier to fly on 2 engines than was the simulator.

I can only recall a couple of actual RAF 2-eng landings, one* of which was in the early days of the VC10K3. The nacelle stub wing drain holes on one side had been blocked and the stub wing had filled with water; in a descent from high level the engine control linkages on that side froze up. So the approach was flown with 2 engines stuck at idle, but the other 2 working OK, which meant no loss of systems.

The other was perhaps the XV109 incident in 1988, although I'm not sure whether they lost 2 engines. Despite the groundcrews' loudly voiced concerns, the crew elected to fly back to Brize with a damaged tyre. Which subsequently blew up, taking out an hydraulic system, as well as causing a 15000 lb fuel leak and other damage. The Captain and Air Eng were entirely at fault and later tried to claim that the tyre had been OK. Their pressonitis nearly lost the RAF a VC10. The BoI found that they'd bullied the GE and had then lied to try and cover their sorry arses.

*flown by the late 'Lord Percy' RIP.

[charliegolf]

Shame they never stuck a couple of RB211’s or similar on the backend as an update.

Didn't they stick one on one side of a VC10 as a testbed? Or did I dream that?

CG

They did! (https://www.reddit.com/r/WeirdWings/comments/cz14qz/vickers_vc10_testbed_with_rollsroyce_rb211_engine/)

[Bergerie1]

When I was a training captain on VC10s back in 1976, new captains were required to practise a double engine failure on take-off followed by a two engine approach, go-around and landing. We never closed the HP cock in my day. The procedure, if I remember correctly, was to close one throttle just after V1, followed by the other on the same side at around 100ft. I always thought the first part to be a bit hairy and so was very cautious. As the trainer in the RHS, I would close No. 4 first, followed by No. 3 and I always kept my hand on that throttle until I knew the trainee had it all under control and climbing safely away.

We always did it at a light weight and, by keeping my hand on the No. 3 throttle, I could always add a little power if the initial climb performance looked a bit too marginal. Thereafter, round the circuit and for the approach, go-around and landing, it was all straightforward. It was never done as a 'surprise test'; always as a confidence building demonstration.

There were two genuine double engine failure incidents during route flying. This one at Heathrow Incidents and Accidents (http://www.vc10.net/History/incidents_and_accidents.html#Engine%20Disintegrates)

Also, another in the US, I think out of New York, followed by a safe landing. Perhaps Jelle Hieminger has the details. I seem to recall that the captain elected to keep one of the engines running for a while, even though it had a fire warning, until he had everything sorted out. After the event, he was criticised for this (most unfairly) even though it proved to be absolutely the correct decision.

[Dan Winterland]

Indeed we did, Dan! It was when we took ZA144 on its last flight to be scrapped. I seem to recall that there was some limitation on the southern taxiway, so a short landing was preferable. Your prompt spoilers, idle then full reverse certainly helped us to stop - whilst I was getting drenched in some water which had gathered in the roof panel or whatever!

A 20 min flight, followed by a slow trip home in an uncomfortable white van along the M4 via Swindon....

Just checked the logbook BEagle. It reminded me that we did that flight on three engines. I seem to recall the engineers robbing one the day before and putting the dud one back in it's place. Three appeared to be enough!

[ATSA1]

I often wonder about a "Super Super VC10" with 2 RB211s..especially when they were reborn as tankers...

It would have been far more fuel efficient, maybe not as fast, but a quiet VC10? Nah...the lovely noise of those 4 RR Conways were part of the attraction!

When I was on holiday at Ascension, an engineer told me that a VC10 had a similar fuel burn to the Tristars just coming into service, but the Tristar could carry a lot more payload!

I can still remember waking up in the middle of the night in Crawley, hearing the ghostly howl of the British Caledonian VC10s winding down... Luvverly!

[SpringHeeledJack]

I was the one who flew the Sultan of Oman's Royal Flight VC10 A4O-AB into the Brooklands Museum in July 1987. The runway gets shorter every time I'm asked to tell the tale about how long the Brooklands runway actually was!

Is there a video of the VC10 landing at Brooklands on the internet ? I've seen a video on a small tv screen within the display of the aircraft at Brooklands, but have never seen it anywhere else. Vanguard yes, VC10 no. BTW, nice bit of flying sir!

[Bergerie1]

SHJ, Well done sir!

[Jhieminga]

Is there a video of the VC10 landing at Brooklands on the internet ?
It was filmed by a professional team, but due to copyright issues this footage can’t be uploaded to the internet. There is a DVD available about the history of aviation at Brooklands and that includes some shots of the VC10's landing.

(Edit) This one: https://buy.myonlinebooking.co.uk/brooklandsmuseum/shop/product.aspx?catid=9&id=421

[navstar1]

The AOC in C Air Support Command Sir Harry Burton was also on the aircraft.

[VictorGolf]

When I lived in Kenya I used to
live on the opposite side of Nairobi to Embakasi, the main airport at the time. On a quiet African night we could hear the East African VC-10s taking off for London at around 2300. I could never quite reconcile that volume of noise with the comparative hush in the cabin. Wasn't the advertising slogan something like "Swift, Silent , Serene"? Although maybe that was BOAC not EAA.

[cessnapete]

The abundance of power in the VC10 was great to have up your sleeve in a possible emergency.
During the days of BOAC VC10 ops out of Nairobi, (5300ft.) we even had an emergency clean up procedure to cope with the unlikely event of a double engine failure, shortly after take off, Northbound to Europe.
Practiced in the Sim, I don’t recall it happening for real. I can’t remember the exact details, but it involved splitting the flap/ LE slat lever, ( They normally retracted together) and at a suitable speed firstly retracting the flaps and after further acceleration, the slats
This procedure was combined with an emergency terrain avoidance routing too, which continued with the early B747-100, which didn’t climb that well after an engine failure out of Nairobi, at the heavy weights departing Northbound.

[esscee]

Aah yes, the stub wing "drain holes"!

[NutLoose]

Is there a video of the VC10 landing at Brooklands on the internet ? I've seen a video on a small tv screen within the display of the aircraft at Brooklands, but have never seen it anywhere else. Vanguard yes, VC10 no. BTW, nice bit of flying sir!


I went to do some work on it along with others from Brize LSS before I left, we treated the paintwork with some special coating to stave of the inevitable.

As for crews doing stupid things, there was the fuel leak they discovered in Hong Kong on a wing, the skin was actually cracked, but they decided to fly it back to Brize anyway, IIRC the thing with the Tens wing skins etc was they were rolled. so could have cracked open like a zip..

[superplum]

flown by the late 'Lord Percy' RIP.

Was XV109 - Sir Arthur Scarfe - jinxed or was this 1984? I, together with the majority of my 41 Sqn grouindcrew coleagues, experienced an engine failure during takeoff from Deci for return to Colt after APC in Sep 84 (?) There was mayhem in the cockpit (door was open) and a lot of stiff necks from straining to see from the backwards facing seats! After a fuel dump and landing at Cagliari (?) we were bussed back to Deci to await a replacement VC10. Time was not wasted by carrying out a runway FOD walk to retrieve the blades and fragments - a few birs ended up as Sqn trophies I recall!

[Jhieminga]

NutLoose, when was that? In the late 90s there was a regular 'washing party' that came over once a year or so. I can't recall any special coatings then, was this later perhaps?

[Jhieminga]

Also, another in the US, I think out of New York, followed by a safe landing.
It could be this one: https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=46459&key=0 although they don't mention the involvement of a second engine.
I have seen photos of the aftermath, basically no.3 engine spat out a disc through the bottom of the nacelle, with the associated collateral damage and lightly singed edges. No.4 engine doesn't appear to have been damaged, at least the outside of the nacelle did not show it, but the compressor stall on no.3 could have influenced the airflow into no.4 of course.

[NutLoose]

NutLoose, when was that? In the late 90s there was a regular 'washing party' that came over once a year or so. I can't recall any special coatings then, was this later perhaps?

It would have been 88 I think as I left early 89, they had just managed to evict a family of Gypies that had taken up residence in it earlier and had set up a lot of donated movement sensors around the aircraft, we supplied a complete set of new blanks for the aircraft as well as applying the coating with brushes. The museum was just in its infancy, looked around the work on the Wellington, visited the stratosphere chamber that was untouched and Barnes's office, a picture of us all was in the Brize magazine. We also took a Sherpa around the banked track.

[NutLoose]

It could be this one: https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=46459&key=0 although they don't mention the involvement of a second engine.
I have seen photos of the aftermath, basically no.3 engine spat out a disc through the bottom of the nacelle, with the associated collateral damage and lightly singed edges. No.4 engine doesn't appear to have been damaged, at least the outside of the nacelle did not show it, but the compressor stall on no.3 could have influenced the airflow into no.4 of course.


We also spat the arse end out of No 2 ( I think) on the detuner at Brize, I was in that one lol.

[ZD241_VC10]

Engines inboard at the tail. I seriously doubt assymetric was anything like as bad as Albert on 2!

Hell I doubt it was as bad as a Jetstream on 1!

Or indeed as bad as it’s (relative) American contemporaries, 707, DC-8 etc.

[RetiredBA/BY]

6500 feet for a VC 10, no problem , even at MLW 107, 500 kg ( if IRCC) even with only two reversers.

......and NO Beagle, BOAC instructors did NOT close the HP cocks for engine failure simulation, at least not in my time.

We learned the folly of that after the Meteor bloodbath at Driffied back in 50 s .

RW 23 at LHR was just about 6,500 feet.( yes I know it was used when the xwind on 29 was strong !)

[Bergerie1]

RW 23 was also OK for a 707.

[treadigraph]

I saw a BA 747 land on 23 once...

[NutLoose]

6500 feet for a VC 10, no problem , even at MLW 107, 500 kg ( if IRCC) even with only two reversers.

......and NO Beagle, BOAC instructors did NOT close the HP cocks for engine failure simulation, at least not in my time.

We learned the folly of that after the Meteor bloodbath at Driffied back in 50 s .

RW 23 at LHR was just about 6,500 feet.( yes I know it was used when the xwind on 29 was strong !)

That sounds dodgy, it reminds me of another..

10/08/1947 American Airlines
DC-4 El Paso, Texas

As a prank, a captain riding in the jump seat engaged the gust lock in flight. The command pilot, not knowing the gust lock had been engaged, rolled the elevator trim tab with no response. When the jump seat captain disengaged the gust lock, the aircraft went into into a steep dive, executed part of an outside roll and become inverted. Neither the command nor jump seat captain had seat belts on and they accidentally feathered No. 1, 2 and 4 engines when they hit the controls with their heads. No one realized it at the time but the feathering reduced power and allowed the co-pilot, who was strapped in, to pull out of the dive 350 feet from the ground.

[RAFEngO74to09]

Didn't they stick one on one side of a VC10 as a testbed? Or did I dream that?

CG

They did! (https://www.reddit.com/r/WeirdWings/comments/cz14qz/vickers_vc10_testbed_with_rollsroyce_rb211_engine/)

More on the VC-10 RB-211 Test Bed here: https://www.vc10.net/History/Individual/XR809.html

[JW411]

Well, I can well remember landing on 23 at Heathrow in 1984 when I was flying the DC-10-30 and if it had been "only 6,500 feet" that might have got my attention. As it was, it was a complete non-event.

Incidentally, when I was flying DC-10s for Fred, I met one of my old RAF co-pilots overhead Gander one night. I was en route from LAX to LGW and he was flying a VC-10 from IAD to BZZ. He had 139 passengers on board and I had 345 plus 10 tons of freight under the floor. He was burning just a little bit more fuel than I was (somewhere around 18,000 lbs per hour).

There is no doubt that the VC-10 was a wonderful bit of kit but it was very hard to make it a commercial success.

[Vendee]

Well, I can well remember landing on 23 at Heathrow in 1984 when I was flying the DC-10-30 and if it had been "only 6,500 feet" that might have got my attention. As it was, it was a complete non-event.



A quick measure of it on google maps indicates that it was about 7400 feet.

[RetiredBA/BY]

Not just VC10s. Concorde could and did (Exeter, 6,800 feet, 2000m) land on that length of DRY runaway. Vref 160 k, no spoilers but wonderful carbon brakes !

Interesting point on the VC10 /Tristar. I was loaned from BA. to GulfAir when they were changing to the 1011.A dispatcher showed me a VC10 and Tristar fuel plans, almost identical. VC10, 130 ish pax, TriStar 300 plus !

[Dave]

Cosford? 3600ft..... Ok it was a BA one, but still a VC-10!

[4runner]

Wasn’t the whole point of the VC-10 to be able to go into hot, high and short fields? To connect the empire?

[Herod]

Cosford? 3600ft..... Ok it was a BA one, but still a VC-10!

Not quite. "21 June 2015 Delivery via M6 motorway and Shifnal of 93-ft long main fuselage section to RAFM Cosford – for positioning on airfield for initial reassembly."

[bainsey]

Got to say he's right, the BA one landed there I know i watched it land. Took the tops of the trees, very impressive. Early eighties I think.

[Jackonicko]

Well, I can well remember landing on 23 at Heathrow in 1984 when I was flying the DC-10-30 and if it had been "only 6,500 feet" that might have got my attention. As it was, it was a complete non-event.

Incidentally, when I was flying DC-10s for Fred, I met one of my old RAF co-pilots overhead Gander one night. I was en route from LAX to LGW and he was flying a VC-10 from IAD to BZZ. He had 139 passengers on board and I had 345 plus 10 tons of freight under the floor. He was burning just a little bit more fuel than I was (somewhere around 18,000 lbs per hour).

There is no doubt that the VC-10 was a wonderful bit of kit but it was very hard to make it a commercial success.

Comparing the VC10 with a TriStar is comparing different generations of aircraft. How about compared to a 707? Or a Conway 707? Or a Convair 990?

[pr00ne]

Jackonicko,

OK,

707= 865 sold.

VC10 =54 sold.

How about that?

[Archimedes]

Not quite. "21 June 2015 Delivery via M6 motorway and Shifnal of 93-ft long main fuselage section to RAFM Cosford – for positioning on airfield for initial reassembly."

Cosford has had two VC10s as part of the museum. When it was still the Aerospace Museum, it was home to the BA collection which included VC10 'Victor Mike', which was flown in at some point in 1979/1980 as the collection was assembled. BA provided funding for the upkeep of the aircraft, but withdrew this support in the early 2000s. By that point, the 'mission' of Cosford had changed, after the 'Aerospace Museum' moniker was dropped, and the Trustees of the RAFM, AIUI, were unwilling to spend money on BA airframes when their duty was to RAF and Cold War types rather than civilian airframes (I have a very dim recollection that this is why the Britannia was repainted in RAF colours) Most of the BA aircraft were broken up with some (all?) of the fuselages/nose sections preserved and dispersed to other collections (the Viscount survived intact and went to East Fortune, I think it was), and 'Victor Mike's' fuselage now resides at Brooklands.
Edit - Wrong; the 1-11 is still intact and outside at East Fortune; the 707 was meant to go there in one piece as well, but only the forward fuselage survives.

Cosford was thus lacking a VC10 for a period until 'Bob' arrived - via the M6 as you say.

[Jackonicko]

Jackonicko,

OK,

707= 865 sold.

VC10 =54 sold.

How about that?

I meant with regard to fuel burn. But you knew that, didn't you?

[pr00ne]

Jackonicko,


Arf!

[Chris Scott]

I often wonder about a "Super Super VC10" with 2 RB211s..especially when they were reborn as tankers...
It would have been far more fuel efficient, maybe not as fast, but a quiet VC10? Nah...the lovely noise of those 4 RR Conways were part of the attraction!
When I was on holiday at Ascension, an engineer told me that a VC10 had a similar fuel burn to the Tristars just coming into service, but the Tristar could carry a lot more payload!
I can still remember waking up in the middle of the night in Crawley, hearing the ghostly howl of the British Caledonian VC10s winding down... Luvverly!

Yes, the unique sound of four Conways idling after landing and then spooling down at some tropical aerodrome - so often at night - was the cue to alight from the crew transport and go to work!

Returning to the TS's original question: after the fuel crisis of 1973, the high fuel flows on the VC10 did become a commercial disadvantage. The mature B707-320Cs of BCAL (British Caledonian) with their JT3D turbofans had far superior payload-range capability out of major sea-level airfields, of course, and the days of our handful of early-production VC10s were numbered. But, unlike the Seven-ohs in the days before we introduced engine over-boost and increased V-speeds, they were able to do Nairobi/Gatwick direct. Their superior short-hot-high performance provided our commercial department with occasional charter opportunities, including some Greek islands.

In January 1974 I was P2 on a charter flight with 150 pax from Hurn to Tenerife-North. (Our a/c were "Standard" Type 1103s, which had the "super" wing-chord extension and the "combi" freight door.) IIRC, at that time the Bournemouth runway was only 6000 ft, and TCI (as it was then) was nearly 4 hours. Understandably, the skipper elected to do both legs but allowed me to handle the subsequent empty-ferry BOH/LGW. Because it was not one of our regular aerodromes, "Graduated" T/O thrust (using the assumed-temperature method) was not permissible. So rated thrust was used and, as I throttled back (the Conway is an "N2 engine" for in-flight power settings) to climb thrust passing 2000 ft and called for flaps and slats retraction, the VSI was top of scale so I had to start the push-over immediately to avoid busting the initial cleared altitude of 6000 ft and continue reducing thrust to avoid exceeding the flap-limiting speed..

Another slight advantage of the VC10, with its high, tail-mounted engines close together, was that it could operate on runways narrower than the standard 150 ft. So we introduced a schedule to Blantyre-Chileka (via Nairobi) on behalf of Air Malawi, who bought our last remaining VC10 at the end of 1974. IIRC, Chileka width was/is 90 ft. That advantage over the B707 and DC-8, not to mention the wide-bodies, became less important when Malawi switched its main airport to a new capital city; Lilongwe.

[NutLoose]

Cosford was thus lacking a VC10 for a period until 'Bob' arrived - via the M6 as you say.


And walking around that it doesn’t bode well for its future, panels off underneath, taxi lights on front fuselage full of water for want of resealing or at least a hole drilled in the bottom of the Perspex cover to let it out.. taking parts off the ones in store at Abingdon showed me how rapidly they could deteriorate in a short space of time stored outside. At the very minimum if the panels are off to prevent condensation then stuff nylon mesh up inside to stop bird ingress.

[Herod]

Archimedes. Thanks for that. I stand corrected. Apologies to Dave. I knew there were BA aircraft there "back in the day", but I wasn't aware of the type. I guess at that point I was flying a 737 out of either Stansted or Gatwick, so wasn't involved with the museum.

[NutLoose]

BA apprentices I believe used to carry out maintenance on them at Cosford, after they withdrew support, that was when they were broken up, the 707 was a particularly rare example being the sole surviving Conway powered 707 If memory serves me correctly.

more

https://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/205716-ba-collection-raf-cosford-under-threat-merged-3.html

[NutLoose]

Images of the fleet

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=390723

[Herod]

At least there is (was?) one at Duxford, along with a Trident, 1-11, Viscount and a few others

[NutLoose]

Still there in BOAC colours I think

[pax britanica]

One of the above comments brought back a lot of memories for me-a lone VC10 parked outside a small terminal somewhere in what was once the Empire .

I worked in a ot of far flung locations and going home often meant a cab ride through deserted streets to a small airport . It is late at night and the poor quality yellow ramp lights illuminate that amazing tail plane in the old royal blue BOAC colours no other aircraft had that majestic feature .No real security in those days and often not many pax. Sometimes you even recognised a crew member or they recognised you and as you step from the mobile steps (jetties- no way ) across the threshold into the doorway you were 90% of the way home.

On the other hand sometimes-quite often back then- inbound flights were late but no internet or mobile to warn you so you prop up the airport bar,again with people you often know, until you hear that shattering roar of those Conways in full reverse (did all the engines have reversers or just the outers) and then that strange unique ghostly wine when a VC10 taxied in and parked on an empty ramp or one with a couple of Fokker 27s and a well worn DC 3
.
VC10s took me safely smoothly and silently to many places around the world and home again and probably marked the zenith of the days when flying was in anyway romantic.

[treadigraph]

At least there is (was?) one at Duxford, along with a Trident, 1-11, Viscount and a few others

Yep there's a Super VC-10 at Duxford in BOAC c/s.

[bainsey]

Often used wonder why when landing in a military vc10 at a hostile air head they would turn all the lights out. If you were going to shout it down you would just aim at we're all the noise was coming from.

[dagama]

One does not train for death but in the sim we crashed most times and lived to write this post!

[Union Jack]

One of the above comments brought back a lot of memories for me-a lone VC10 parked outside a small terminal somewhere in what was once the Empire .

I worked in a ot of far flung locations and going home often meant a cab ride through deserted streets to a small airport . It is late at night and the poor quality yellow ramp lights illuminate that amazing tail plane in the old royal blue BOAC colours no other aircraft had that majestic feature .No real security in those days and often not many pax. Sometimes you even recognised a crew member or they recognised you and as you step from the mobile steps (jetties- no way ) across the threshold into the doorway you were 90% of the way home.

On the other hand sometimes-quite often back then- inbound flights were late but no internet or mobile to warn you so you prop up the airport bar,again with people you often know, until you hear that shattering roar of those Conways in full reverse (did all the engines have reversers or just the outers) and then that strange unique ghostly wine when a VC10 taxied in and parked on an empty ramp or one with a couple of Fokker 27s and a well worn DC 3
.
VC10s took me safely smoothly and silently to many places around the world and home again and probably marked the zenith of the days when flying was in anyway romantic.

Sounds like drinking Marsovin in Malta - a second bottle to take away the taste of the first, and after that you're well past caring.... And yes, I greatly enjoyed my VC10 flights courtesy of the light blue.

Jack

[frieghtdog2000]

I remember Prestwick New York off RWY 03 (6000 ft) with a decent load - the crosswind prevented 13/31 (in those pre-magnetic variation days). The B707 to Toronto canceled. Happy BOAC days!.

[Fareastdriver]

I was driving around the end of Belize runway when I saw a VC10 on finals. On touchdown I swear I could see a ripple travelling ahead on the runway.

Butcher Radar, a previous poster may confirm, would observe the landing halfway down the runway and then hold up large score cards; [7] [2], [8] [1]., etc.

Apparently Air Support Command, or whatever the name of the day was, told them to stop it.

[RetiredBA/BY]

Initially BOAC VC 10s had four reversers., the inboards were later removed, something to do with tailplane oscillation, IIRC.
Effect on landing distance was negligible..

[frieghtdog2000]

The Standards had reversers on the outboards only - Supers on all four but the the inboards were idled by 100 kts to prevent ingestion to the outboards.

[ZD241_VC10]

Cosford has had two VC10s as part of the museum. When it was still the Aerospace Museum, it was home to the BA collection which included VC10 'Victor Mike', which was flown in at some point in 1979/1980 as the collection was assembled. BA provided funding for the upkeep of the aircraft, but withdrew this support in the early 2000s. By that point, the 'mission' of Cosford had changed, after the 'Aerospace Museum' moniker was dropped, and the Trustees of the RAFM, AIUI, were unwilling to spend money on BA airframes when their duty was to RAF and Cold War types rather than civilian airframes (I have a very dim recollection that this is why the Britannia was repainted in RAF colours) Most of the BA aircraft were broken up with some (all?) of the fuselages/nose sections preserved and dispersed to other collections (the Viscount survived intact and went to East Fortune, I think it was), and 'Victor Mike's' fuselage now resides at Brooklands.
Edit - Wrong; the 1-11 is still intact and outside at East Fortune; the 707 was meant to go there in one piece as well, but only the forward fuselage survives.

Cosford was thus lacking a VC10 for a period until 'Bob' arrived - via the M6 as you say.

The original intent was to fly “Bob” in though, hence it was seen doing circuits on the short runway at Cranwell just before it retired. I believe eventually it was declared a no go by someone far higher up the food chain, as although costly, the road move was far lower “risk”.

[ShyTorque]

It is now - it wasn't then! (I was OC Butcher Radar at the time)

(Check Google Earth - poor quality image from 1970 shows the basic runway outline; measure facility shows roughly 6000ft)

It was even shorter for a couple of days, when a Harrier pilot melted the surface down to the limestone, about a third of the way in...... :p

[ShyTorque]

I was driving around the end of Belize runway when I saw a VC10 on finals. On touchdown I swear I could see a ripple travelling ahead on the runway.

Butcher Radar, a previous poster may confirm, would observe the landing halfway down the runway and then hold up large score cards; [7] [2], [8] [1]., etc.

Apparently Air Support Command, or whatever the name of the day was, told them to stop it.

The score cards got even more disrespectful later - the landing got either a "Magic" or "Crap".

[Chris Scott]

BUA flew in and out of Ndola - I think that was quite short

Yes, the first BUA VC10 - a Type 1103 later incorporated into BCAL after Caledonian took over BUA in 1970/71 - replaced Britannias on the weekly BR211 route Gatwick/Entebbe/Ndola/Lusaka-City/Salisbury in October 1964, arriving SAY on a Thursday afternoon and departing the following morning on the reverse route at about 08:00 local time. So the more demanding northbound departure from Ndola for Entebbe would have been at about 11:00 local, WHBM?

A report from 1961 states that Rwy 10 at Ndola was 6650 ft long (and only 100 ft wide), with an elevation of 4166 ft amsl. That would still have applied in 1964/5, as the runway was not extended to its present 8250 ft x 150 ft until the late-1960s. In the absence of any figures for stopway and clearway, I'll assume conservatively that they were nil. So TOR, ED/ASD and TOD equal. The runway slope appears to be about 0.4% down.

Assuming still air with a temperature of 27C (ISA+20) - both conservative values - the Type 1103 T/O performance charts indicate a "D" value of 6700 ft, the most limiting parameter in this case, giving an RTOW of about 105.5 tonnes (37 tonnes below structural). Ndola/Entebbe flight time would be about 2 hours. In the absence of any quick-calculation fuel tables, I guess 20 tonnes would be a ball-park fuel figure, using Nairobi as the alternate. APS weight in a typical mixed-passenger configuration was, IIRC, about 70 tonnes, so a payload of 15 tonnes might have been achievable on that short sector.

[WHBM]

Firstly WHBM has a family story from the same area.
One of the above comments brought back a lot of memories for me-a lone VC10 parked outside a small terminal somewhere in what was once the Empire.

I worked in a ot of far flung locations and going home often meant a cab ride through deserted streets to a small airport... sometimes-quite often back then- inbound flights were late but no internet or mobile to warn you so you prop up the airport bar ... until you hear that shattering roar of those Conways in full reverse ..
Aunt was a stereotypical Expat in Zambia, and was returning to the UK one time from Lusaka. Outward BOAC VC-10 then changed crews at Nairobi, slip crew did the Nairobi-Lusaka-Nairobi rounder, and slipped again for the return. Lusaka BOAC staff was one Expat manager, plus locals.

On this occasion the inbound was indeed late, bit of uncertainty when it might arrive. Poor expat manager doing his best is assailed by an American group of mining engineers until aunt steps forward and informs them firmly "I say, I think [Mr Smith] is really doing his best here, it will come when it comes". Later she passes him at the desk and says she was just going for a cup of tea, and would he like one too.

Finally it arrives and eventually boarding commences. In the disorderly grumbling queue manager leans across and says "Mrs [WHBM's aunt], I have to say you are the only passenger today who has been remotely civil to me". Voice lowers. "Um, I have one first class seat spare. Would you like it ? Ah, good, have you got your boarding card for a moment please ...". Which story she told for the rest of her life.

[Justin Cyder-Belvoir]

Engines inboard at the tail. I seriously doubt assymetric was anything like as bad as Albert on 2!

Hell I doubt it was as bad as a Jetstream on 1!
Jetstream on1 was a pussy cat: we used to shut 1 down during assym demo and do steep turns!
You should have tried a heavy Vulcan on 2!

[WHBM]

Yes, the first BUA VC10 - a Type 1103 later incorporated into BCAL after Caledonian took over BUA in 1970/71 - replaced Britannias on the weekly BR211 route Gatwick/Entebbe/Ndola/Lusaka-City/Salisbury in October 1964, arriving SAY on a Thursday afternoon and departing the following morning on the reverse route at about 08:00 local time. So the more demanding northbound departure from Ndola for Entebbe would have been at about 11:00 local, WHBM?.
Although I can't find a BUA timetable of the era (used to have them though, inevitably lost over decades in the school-uni-rented flats-first house progression), BOAC very kindly put the BUA VC-10 from Lusaka in their own timetable. Here's 1966. By this time Salisbury has had to be given up, though SAA have stepped into the breach.

http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/ba2/ba66/ba66-24.jpg

BR212 - Fridays

Lusaka - 1035
Ndola - 1120/1205
Entebbe - 1515/1615
Gatwick - 2230

[Jhieminga]

I've got some performance data for a Super VC10 (EAA version) here (https://www.vc10.net/Technical/perf_manual_index.html) if anyone wants to check the calculations.

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

The score cards got even more disrespectful later - the landing got either a "Magic" or "Crap".
Confirmed! There was also the addition of a 'flashing' version of each score. (And no, I wasn't responsible for the change! - it was de facto on my arrival).

[Hot 'n' High]

Blimey, Jackonicko, what a fascinating Thread this has become, particularly if you dive out into the likes of VC10.net! Any thoughts on changing the Thread title to "The amazing VC10 Thread" or similar?!!!!!!!! :ok:

I actually started my Aviation "Maintenance" career on a VC10. :} Erm, I wasn't exactly qualified to do so as I was still at school at the time. And the VC10 subjected to my "tinkering" was none other than XR809/G-AXLR which has already been mentioned above. Realising that maybe it was a tad unairworthy, a couple of small panels appeared in my bedroom as a result. :\

Now, in my defence, M'lud, it was on the Dump at RAF Kemble at the time looking very much like Image 26 at C/n 829 - XR809 (http://www.vc10.net/History/Individual/XR809.html) when I made my valiant but unsuccessful effort to clear the outstanding defects in the 700 and get her back to the Line "S", and my covert ingress/egress route to the aircraft from the fence would have helped me in the SAS - had I followed that particular Military career.

It's a fair cop I guess so I best I fess up. Later on I became slightly more productive in helping to keep the FAA and RAF in the air for 3 decades. Well, that's my opinion - other's may differ with their thoughts on that.

Ah, 1976/77 - happy days! :ok: Cheers, H 'n' H

[MrBernoulli]

The Standards had reversers on the outboards only - Supers on all four but the the inboards were idled by 100 kts to prevent ingestion to the outboards.
Are you sure about that? I thought it was only the prototype, and maybe a couple of the very early production airframes, that had reversers on all four. Haven't got my various books to hand, but I think I am correct.

In any event, I flew all the VC10 variants in RAF service, and all of them were outboard engine reversers only - the K2 (originally BOAC/Gulf Air standard VC10s); K3 (originally East African Airways super VC10s); K4 (originally BOAC/BA super VC10s); and the C1/C1K (directly acquired by RAF from Vickers, a sort of 'hybrid' with standard fuselage, super wing, and some other super mods).

Initially BOAC VC 10s had four reversers., the inboards were later removed, something to do with tailplane oscillation, IIRC.
Effect on landing distance was negligible..
Maybe because the effect of any of the VC10 reversers was negligible? 😂 I have a recollection it was fin vibration, so similar.

[Jetset 88]

ATSA1 - loved your line through "on holiday" in your post about when you were at Ascension. It tickled me pink.
Must have passed you in Concertina City sometime in 82. Rgds

[ATSA1]

70plus - I did indeed stay in Concertina city, but I didnt get my holiday tan until November 83...My VC10 flight down from BZN was cancelled due to a fleet grounding due to an aileron problem I think...anyone else recall? But 14 hours in a C130 was a poor substitute!

But my return to Blighty in May 84 was indeed courtesy of a VC10..XV106.. a cargo fit, but empty, apart from a couple of rows of seats at the back...I think there were about 6 of us as pax...

We did manage a game of football with a tennis ball on the way back, tripping over the track rollers!...until the ball hit the cabin door got hit hard by a flying volley, and one of the crew came out and told us "turn it in"

Can I claim the only football game played in an airborne VC10?

[Chris Scott]

Although I can't find a BUA timetable of the era (used to have them though, inevitably lost over decades in the school-uni-rented flats-first house progression), BOAC very kindly put the BUA VC-10 from Lusaka in their own timetable. Here's 1966. By this time Salisbury has had to be given up, though SAA have stepped into the breach.
http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/ba2/ba66/ba66-24.jpg
BR212 - Fridays
Lusaka - 1035
Ndola - 1120/1205
Entebbe - 1515/1615
Gatwick - 2230

Yes, WHBM. As you know, BUA had to give up SAY soon after Rhodesia declared UDI on 11/11/65. But actually you didn't lose this BUA "winter" timetable for 1964/5, which you posted on a previous thread about BUA's unique, night-stopping, West African coastal service:
http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/complete/br64/br64-06.jpg

Salisbury 08:00 (06:00Z) - 08:50 Lusaka-City 09:35 - 10;20 Ndola 11:05 (09:05Z) - 14:15 (11:15Z).Entebbe 15:15 (12:15Z) - 20:30Z Gatwick.
So scheduled flight time NLA/EBB about 1:50 (https://www.pprune.org/showthread.php?p=10737511), and EBB/LGW about 8:00.

I never did Ndola, but remember flying the same a/c out of ENTEBBE on the next sector in that schedule - the direct leg to Gatwick - in the early 1970s before Rwy 17/35 was constructed. At that time, Rwy 12/30 was 9875 ft long at an aerodrome elevation of 3789 ft (later corrected to 3782 ft); Rwy 12 slope was 0.36% down. No stopways, but the clearways were maximal over Lake Victoria.

Unlike Nairobi's much longer runway, where we could use Flap 14.5 for the T/O, thereby improving the WAT (second-segment climb) performance, at Entebbe we had to use Flaps 20 if the RTOW was critical. Like Ndola, however, runway characteristics were more limiting than WAT. In calm conditions, Rwy 12 was preferable to Rwy 30, owing to its down-slope of 0.36%. However, due to that down-slope, the brake kinetic-energy limited the V1 slightly below optimum for the "R" value. That led to an RTOW of 138,500 kg (nearly 4 tonnes below structural). At that weight, the speeds would be as follows:
V1 = 132; VR = 152; V2 = 160; Minimum FRIS (flap-retraction initiation speed) = 190; Minimum clean speed (V2 [20] + 60) = 220.

After T/O with Flap 20, our SOP didn't permit an early retraction to Flaps 14.5. Once back to climb thrust at 1500 ft QFE, the climb with Flaps 20 to the flap-retraction altitude (either 2000ft or 3000ft, I forget which) was comparatively sluggish, sometimes exacerbated at night by an inversion of temperature. It was essential to level off for the flaps/slats retraction segment, which was initiated at Min FRIS (see above). The target then was to reach the minimum clean speed of, in this example, 220 kt, before the flap and slat retraction was completed, without exceeding the VFE of 229 kt. Acceleration in level flight was not brilliant and it was common for the first tier of the stall protection system - engine ignition - to be triggered briefly at some point, causing amber stall-ignition lights to flicker on the flight-engineer's panel. They didn't like that much...

So what kind of payload would be possible at a T.O.W. of 138.5T (138,500 kg), assuming a flight time to Gatwick of 8:00 hrs, using Manchester as the alternate? Initial cruise altitude on a Type 1103 would be FL350, with a step climb to FL390 around Kufra (south-east Libya), coasting out near Benghazi and step-climbing to FL430 near Elba. Trip fuel would be about 47.8T plus reserves of about 7.4T at take-off, giving a T/O fuel requirement of 55.2T (56.1T ramp fuel). Assuming a typical Dry Operating Weight of 70.0T, the maximum payload would be 13.3T (ZFW 83.3T). Allowing an average of 100 kg per adult passenger with baggage, that would have enabled a full cabin in BUA's scheduled all-economy config (132Y) pertaining in 1964/5.

[NutLoose]

I seem to remember one came back from Kenya with the gear down after nose gear problems.

[Chris Scott]

I seem to remember one came back from Kenya with the gear down after nose gear problems.
That would have been interesting. Don't think I can lay my hands on any figures for empty U/C-down ferrying.

I feel a bit out of order posting data for BUA's Type 1103, as none of them was ever acquired by the RAF, although we (BCAL) eventually sold one (G-ATDJ) to HMG. I think the RAF C1 (can't remember which Type number that was, but perhaps Jhieminga will remind us) mentioned above by MrBernoulli shared similarities with the Type 1103: "Standard" fuselage with main-deck cargo door and "Super" wing-chord extension. However, its performance would have been different because it had more powerful Conways than ours. It also had an APU (what we would have done for that!) and, IIRC, a fin tank like the Super VC10s. The fin tank may have improved the cruise performance by providing a more aft CG when the centre tank was full, enabling less nose-up trim on the TPI.

[WHBM]

So what kind of payload would be possible at a T.O.W. of 138.5T (138,500 kg), assuming a flight time to Gatwick of 8:00 hrs, using Manchester as the alternate? ... Allowing an average of 100 kg per adult passenger with baggage, that would have enabled a full cabin in BUA's scheduled all-economy config (132Y) pertaining in 1964/5.
As those who handled these routes at the time may recall, there is a longstanding airfreight demand from Europe southward to Africa, comprising all sorts from medical supplies, car parts, electronics, in fact just about anything that you don't want to turn up 3 months later via seafreight and onward overland transport with more than half smashed or pilfered. Return loads not much. This suited the MTOWs of sea level takeoffs in Europe compared to the hot & high ones in Africa.

Nowadays with more capable and capacious aircraft, the northbound cargo space available is what has driven the fresh foodstuffs and flowers export development from East Africa to Europe. Sometimes argued against by the Greta team for airfreighting, but in fact it's just taking advantage of marginal capacity which otherwise always returned empty.

I did hear that the main time the pax cabin was full northbound was when all the expat kids were returning to boarding school, apparently flights that were an interesting challenge for the cabin crew. I wonder if you could make any reduction in allowable weight per pax then.

[NutLoose]

That would have been interesting. Don't think I can lay my hands on any figures for empty U/C-down ferrying.



I seem to remember they were on the way into Nairobi and couldn't get the nose gear down, after several attempts it locked, but they warned the tower to scramble the fire service in case, rolling down the runway the Loadie expressed his disgust at passing what was no more that an couple of guys in a ropy looking vehicle.. It was decided to fly it back the UK gear down and erm burnt a weee bit of fuel.

[Ascend Charlie]

The world went through a rear-engine phase with the VC-10 "Hushhh Power", the DC-9, and the B 727 "Nothin' hush here, buddy!"

Why are there no more rear engines, apart from the Bizjets which are too low to the ground to have them underslung? The good points at the time were that the engine noise was behind most of the pax, the wing was clean and more efficient, and asymmetrics were easier to handle.

But why no big rear-jets any more?

[Runaway Gun]

The engines slung under the wings help prevent fatigue issues with excessing wing bending with lift - the engine weight helps oppose it.

[Ironpot]

Runaway Gun - brilliant moniker!

[Jhieminga]

Correct on all counts Chris :ok: The original RAF variant has type number 1106, but was relabeled to a type 1180 when converted for inflight refuelling. Starting with the Ghana Airways type 1102s, the wing basically stayed the same for both the newer Standards and the Supers, apart from a different configuration of outboard fences and some small changes to the leading edge next to the fuselage.

[ScouseFlyer]

Nut Loose
Same thing happened to me mid October 1976-return flight from Nairobi on EAA, scheduled stop in Rome following an earlier stop in Cairo, only to be told we were being turfed off as, if my fading memory is correct, the aircraft had developed an hydraulic fault and would have to return to Heathrow with gear down.
SF

[Cornish Jack]

A little diversion for the aficionados, of which, obviously, there are many!
The piccie below is from my 'workshop' and shows 3 VC10 related items - one obvious, one less so and for VERY early 'users' and the third totally obscure!! Any takers?

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1500x2000/img_0079a_2dc6eea8175c3cc01186640894ed268b7b116d8a.jpg

[WHBM]

The piccie below is from my 'workshop'
I must show this to Mrs WHBM :) , who makes comments occasionally about my couple of shelves of old timetables, to demonstrate what the house MIGHT have been like ...

[Fareastdriver]

The engines slung under the wings help prevent fatigue issues with excessing wing bending with lift - the engine weight helps oppose it.

When I did my tanker ground school in 1962 it was at that time believed that the VC10 tanker was just around the corner. They even had built up instruction boards showing the fuel system etc.

The Valiant always flew with two 12,500 lb capacity underwing tanks, normally full at takeoff and transferred when the fuselage and wing fuel could accept it. Even then one would balance the fuel 66/33 % fuselage/wings. They Valiant was withdrawn in from service in 1965 owing to fatigue corrosion in the wing roots. Would the Valiant have operated without these tanks then the spars would have failed much earlier.

The VC10 tanker could well have been in service by 1965.

[Cornish Jack]

WHBM - just as well I posed my piccie in the tidy working area! :O

[Chris Scott]

As those who handled these routes at the time may recall, there is a longstanding airfreight demand from Europe southward to Africa, comprising all sorts from medical supplies, car parts, electronics, in fact just about anything that you don't want to turn up 3 months later via seafreight and onward overland transport with more than half smashed or pilfered. Return loads not much. This suited the MTOWs of sea level takeoffs in Europe compared to the hot & high ones in Africa.
Yes, as a boyhood example I well remember in the early 1960s the long and frustrating wait to complete my collection of War Planes of the Second World War by William Green...
In the 1970s on our passenger schedules, of course, we crews used to stash all sorts of stuff away in the bulk holds of VC10s and B707s when departing from East and West African airfields, the most popular items being fruit - often packed in tall, wicker baskets with lids, one of which we still use in my household for dirty laundry. During the sugar shortages of 1973(?) in Blighty, when I was on the VC10, the Nairobi street market supplied two-kilo, brown-paper bags of golden granulated that kept us going through the crisis. Then, during the Heath power cuts, I remember bringing back an excellent Tilly lamp - later much surprised to find it was Chinese-made...

Nowadays with more capable and capacious aircraft, the northbound cargo space available is what has driven the fresh foodstuffs and flowers export development from East Africa to Europe. Sometimes argued against by the Greta team for airfreighting, but in fact it's just taking advantage of marginal capacity which otherwise always returned empty.
Quite. In the early 1960s BUA operated an ex-Hunting Clan freighter service with a DC-6A via SAY to JNB (which, IIRC, also carried a few pax). There was also TMA with DC-4s and DC-6A. But, from the late '60s into the 1970s there were Transglobe/Tradewinds with CL-44s and then B707-320Cs; IAS (DC-8-50F?); Trek Airways (B707-320C with uprated JT3Ds); Jack Malloch's Affretair, based in Salisbury, for which the runway was greatly extended for sanctions-busting; and several others whose names elude me.

I did hear that the main time the pax cabin was full northbound was when all the expat kids were returning to boarding school, apparently flights that were an interesting challenge for the cabin crew. I wonder if you could make any reduction in allowable weight per pax then.
That figure I floated of 100 kg per adult with baggage is just a rule of thumb that many of us have long used as one of the gross-error checks of a loadsheet that typically arrives on your lap a few minutes before departure. In my experience, baggage was weighed but standard figures used for pax weights. They are higher now but, in the 1960s/70s, these were (kgs): M = 75; F = 65; Child (below 12 yrs?) = 39; Infant (below 2 yrs) = 8. But, if he wanted to make himself really unpopular with the station staff, the skipper could demand that each or some of the pax be individually weighed. I think this was done sometimes for the school children you mention!. Human nature suggests that, in view of the delay involved, it would only be done if the skipper was persuaded it might avert having to off-load firmly-booked passengers...

[Lezourez]

I don't know how long the runway is on Crete, but in 97 we flew out on route to Oman in a K3 fully tanked up 78 ton with a GE +4 and Jag GC on board and Dick Knight at the helm I swear the mains were on the piano keys whe we eventually got in the air. I was on the jump seat and my then short life flash before my eyes, Oh didn't I mention the bloody big hill/mountain at the end of airfield
Resident Fairy

[RetiredBA/BY]

Nothing special about that. On a Victor 1 tanker at MTOW the mains were always on the piano keys at lift off on Marhams 9000 foot runway ! !

[Chris Scott]

I don't know how long the runway is on Crete, but in 97 we flew out on route to Oman in a K3 fully tanked up 78 ton with a GE +4 and Jag GC on board and Dick Knight at the helm I swear the mains were on the piano keys whe we eventually got in the air. I was on the jump seat and my then short life flash before my eyes, Oh didn't I mention the bloody big hill/mountain at the end of airfield
Resident Fairy
Welcome to PPRuNe, Lezourez! Can you explain to this non-mil novice what are "GE + 4 and Jag GC"?

According to Aerad for April 1996, figures for Heraklion (LGIR), 115 ft amsl, longest runway 09/27 declared distances as follows (slope not stated):
09 TORA/ASDA/TODA 8990 ft, LDA 7415 ft;
27 ditto, LDA 8990 ft.
"When jet barrier raised all distances except LDA 09 reduced by 984 ft."

Or could this be further west at Khania (Souda) LGSA?

[ExAscoteer2]

GE = Ground Engineer - would fly as part of the crew on long routes to maintain the aircraft 'down route'.
+4 = +4 techies
Jag GC = Jaguar (aircraft) Groundcrew

[NutLoose]

Resident Fairy

Did you have your tool kit with you?, Brush Paint 1 inch, for the dusting of instrument faces..

:E

Ex Ten Sootie..

[Chris Scott]

Hi ExAscoteer2,
Thanks for decoding that stuff!

This thread has produced so many anecdotes worthy of discussion, but the following one has to be top of the list...
[...] I was the one who flew the Sultan of Oman's Royal Flight VC10 A4O-AB into the Brooklands Museum in July 1987.
The runway gets shorter every time I'm asked to tell the tale about how long the Brooklands runway actually was! Give or take a bit for my memory lapse after some 33 years, it was between 3,300 ft and 3,500 ft.
[...] At Brooklands we were ultra light with minimal fuel, having only flown from Heathrow via Lasham and Farnborough that day and had just a couple of pax on board, so we were virtually empty.
We had the lines painted the week before and the aim was to Spot-Land our touch down between the two. In the event the rear bogies straddled the first line and, using full reverse thrust with relatively light braking, we actually had to put power on again reach the turn off taxiway in a dignified way at the far end of the runway.
[...] Peformance-A landing requirements for planning a landing assume that only idle reverse thrust is used but full braking is applied. It also assumes that all the flaps speedbrakes and are working normally. However we did actually use full reverse thrust and relatively light footbraking to avoid the brakes getting hot and the tyres then going bang half an hour after shutting down which would have been embarrassing on a day when we were in the 'limelight'. [...]

On a personal note: probably in common with many other pilots, the first time I saw A4O-AB on the ground at Brooklands was from the air, One hazy evening, over a year after your remarkable landing, our new A320 fleet having recently migrated bases from Gatwick to Heathrow, we were being vectored off Biggin R/H downwind for an easterly landing at LHR. Suddenly, the unmistakable shape of a grounded VC10 came into view, passing under the nose. For me, the VC10 was five jet-types earlier. I'd heard that someone had parked a Ten back at the factory, but it wasn't until after seeing it that I learned it was the former G-ASIX, originally BUA's second VC10 after its sister ship, G-ASIW. I'd last flown it FNA/ROB/FNA/LGW, a night flight in the late September of 1974 with Capt Mike Powell just before it was sold to the Sultan.

3500 ft seems really short for a landing, so I've looked at the Type 1103 Ops Manual graph for "Landing distance required - Alternate aerodrome". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I speculate that the VIP config would make for a considerably lower Basic Operating Weight than the 69 tonnes I remember from our mixed F/Y passenger config with all those heavy seats. With just 3 flight crew, 2 passengers and no catering, I'm guessing the Dry Operating Weight might have been - say - 65 tonnes or so? Fuel-wise on landing, I imagine you'd have wanted enough fuel for a G/A and second approach, plus a diversion to Farnborough or Heathrow and about 30 mins holding? That would be about 5 tonnes, so the landing weight might have been the lowest figure on the graph - 70,000 kg. Using still air at a tad above sea-level and zero slope, that gives a landing distance required of 4850 ft.

However, the graph probably assumes a height of 50 ft over the threshold. Had you crossed it at 20 ft on a 3-degree slope, you'd have saved about 600 ft, reducing the figure to 4250 ft. A 10 kt headwind component would reduce it by 400 ft to 3850 ft, but I doubt you would have had that advantage. The dry runway distances don't allow for the reverse thrust you used (on engines 1 and 4), but how much difference does that make on a short runway? 3500 ft sounds challenging, Captain!

[Lezourez]

Did you have your tool kit with you?, Brush Paint 1 inch, for the dusting of instrument faces..

:E

Ex Ten Sootie..
And my abacus for counting the static wicks :hmm:

[MrBernoulli]

On the subject of gear-down ferries, I can recall doing at least two of them in RAF VC10s. I'm sure they were partial gear-down ferries, one from USA to Brize, and one from Middle East to Brize, where one of the main gear legs was locked down due tech issues. As well as the airspeed limitation (270kts/M0.82 max?) the Middle East to Brize trip was complicated further by the requirement to avoid icing conditions. Not easy when it is winter, and night time, trying to find a route (largely ;)) clear of cloud?

[BEagle]

Hi MrB! Wasn't Terry Waite's flight home from 4 years of captivity in a VC10 U/C down ferry flight?

(I admit to winding up one of HM's Bulldogs to a decent speed and turning in on the Spitfire which was holding waiting for his arrival - we had a brief play before a gentlemanly wing waggle and off our on separate ways. It might have been C***f S***k at the helm of the Spit!)

During my hellish 3 week holiday flying alternate days from Antalya and suffering the hardship of the Sheraton, we had a K2 and a K4. For some reason we kept getting the K4 with its wonderfully cool air conditioning, whilst the other crew sweated it out in the K2. Until the day they were due to fly the K4, which turned out to be National PKK Day or something, so DetCo Daisy ordered them to fly the K2 with its 'better defensive systems'. Yeah right - an RWR. After they'd taken off, I asked Daisy about the Int he must have received about the PKK being equipped with radar guided AAA as the RWR was bugger all use in detecting IR ManPads…ar$e!

Then the K4 went U/S with a gear snag, so a crew came out with another jet, before flying the K4 home on a U/C down ferry. Which meant that the other crew never did get to fly the K4!

[Trumpet trousers]

Wasn't Terry Waite's flight home from 4 years of captivity in a VC10 U/C down ferry flight?
ISTR that was Jackie Mann’s flight. Went over my house on the approach to LYE. Would tie-in with the Spit too...

[ExAscoteer2]

Indeed I was at Lyneham when Jackie Mann arrived and had the Spitfire flypast.

[Saintsman]

On the subject of K4s and undercarriage problems, there was a big incident at Filton during their conversions when one main leg kept getting stuck and wouldn’t lower.

As I understand it, after several unsuccessful rectification attempts, the crew refused to fly it until it was fixed. A decision was made to see what was causing it to stick and the main Actuator was disconnected. Unfortunately, when the U/C was operated, it failed to stick and it came down under its own weight and nearly knocked itself of the jacks. It caused considerable damage to the wing.

I don’t know if they ever found out the cause of the original problem.

[BEagle]

Jackie Mann it was indeed!

Saintsman, using the free-fall procedure in that way without any damping or restraint indeed caused a lot of damage!

[nonsense]

That sounds dodgy, it reminds me of another..

10/08/1947 American Airlines
DC-4 El Paso, Texas

As a prank, a captain riding in the jump seat engaged the gust lock in flight. The command pilot, not knowing the gust lock had been engaged, rolled the elevator trim tab with no response. When the jump seat captain disengaged the gust lock, the aircraft went into into a steep dive, executed part of an outside roll and become inverted. Neither the command nor jump seat captain had seat belts on and they accidentally feathered No. 1, 2 and 4 engines when they hit the controls with their heads. No one realized it at the time but the feathering reduced power and allowed the co-pilot, who was strapped in, to pull out of the dive 350 feet from the ground.

https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/33316/dot_33316_DS1.pdf

[blind pew]

Line Training on the VC 10.
Awaiting our onward steed in Sri Lanka 1978 it was announced that it needed a heavy turbulence check which involved shipping a cherry picker by sea from India. After 3 days the aircraft was manoeuvred up to the terminal and engines used a ladder to inspect the tailplane. Whilst the accident report ( left several pax in hospital including a broken back) the true story was a fellow copilot u/t decided to route around a rocket cloud when the captain took over control and flew straight through it to show what a macho man he was.

[Jhieminga]

A little diversion for the aficionados, of which, obviously, there are many!
The piccie below is from my 'workshop' and shows 3 VC10 related items - one obvious, one less so and for VERY early 'users' and the third totally obscure!! Any takers?
I don't think we ever got the answer to what the three items actually are. I'm still curious...

[Cornish Jack]

Had to go searching for the piccie to remind myself!!
The obvious one is the large Paxolin aerofoil shaped item (Slat separator), very useful as a 'French Curve' template. The second is the white painted support for the workbench which is a welded alumunium support 'box', one of a number which supported the 'Visual' model for the original 10 Sim - (large spider and robin on the approach!!) All these supports were sent for scrap when we changed from anologue to digital display - lovely engineering. The final item would be impossible to spot - the 'Jockey wheel' on the support arm in the foreground. This was turned from a largish bar of aircraft grade steel recovered from the Brize workshops scrap bin and kept for the last 30+ years " 'cos it'll come in handy." It originated, I suspect, from one of the hydraulic components. Even on my old Myford, it turned like slicing silk! There was a lot of quality in the 10! :ok:

[Jhieminga]

I guessed that the large shape was slat related, but I would never have gotten anywhere close to a correct answer on the other two items :p

[Chris Scott]

This should be a lot easier to identify...

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x672/p1020398_copy_1faa48d585284b36ba3201fcce8ea322696c8214.jpg

Could it be one of only two VC10 parts in wood?

[Jhieminga]

Which airframe was that one fitted to Chris?

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1000x669/za147_lhtable_6962ff4e1fd38475768126dc01e9e2e5a1ac3fac.jpg

[Chris Scott]

Reckon you've guessed already, Jelle: the unique Type 1109 (http://www.british-caledonian.com/G-ARTA.html)...

Nice photo of another familiar cockpit, but you forgot something obligatory:
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x467/p1020397_copy_795a296b0eeb0f5423bede6c83a346f3719042d0.jpg

[Cornish Jack]

Could it be one of only two VC10 parts in wood?
No - the floor (in the loo, but possibly elsewhere) was a laminate 'sandwich' of balsa wood between aluminium sheets - very strong and excellent for 'second use' in model making! Brize Workshops scrap bin was a little treasure trove!

[NutLoose]

Ahh a female cup, it's got a crack in it.

I thought the big item looked like a rubbing strip made of paxolin? possibly Horizontal Stab or a slat?

[ExAscoteer2]

Ahh a female cup, it's got a crack in it.

What does that even mean? Aside from being sexist drivel.

[old10ge]

Did two gear down ferry flights in two weeks in Aug/sept 89 with the same captain! Gander to Brize 808 and Gut to Brize 807. What a racket at cruising speed.

[OmegaV6]

Daft question .. from a Herc bloke ... what was the gear down limiting speed on a 10 ?? and what was the fuel penalty - given the normal cruise was high and fast ! - I'm guessing "horrendous" might be the answer !! Certainly on the Herc a gear down ferry took forever but the fuel penalty was not too bad ... if ATC let you get to height and travel that slowly !!

[Stanley Eevil]

If the U/C door was open (unlikely), the limiting speed was 254 KIAS. Most gear down ferries would have had the affected leg`s `door` fully closed, in which cast the max speed was actual VNO. In practice, gear down ferries were planned at 270 KIAS, as a compromise with respect to RANGE/DRAG/FUEL FLOW.

[Jhieminga]

Reckon you've guessed already, Jelle: the unique Type 1109 (http://www.british-caledonian.com/G-ARTA.html)...
Aahh... I should have guessed that, but I didn't.... Good to see a bit of the prototype surviving. There are plenty of bits of VC10 shaped skin out there, also ex-G-ARTA, but this item is just a bit more special.

As for gear down speeds, one of the ex-Vickers F/Es once told me that they did VNE dive tests with the gear down, as they needed the drag to control the speed and the gear doors (the ones attached to the leg, not the inboard ones) could take it as long as there was no yaw on the aircraft. I don't know about the fuel penalty for a gear down ferry though, I couldn't find it in the Cruise Control Manual.

[Lokwyr]

Belize 1981: 6000ft exactly from memory, +35C, high humidity - no issues I was aware of, except turning around with no turning circles.

Yep- Belize thrice monthly unless there was something (important?) happening. Add 1982 and 1983 for definite to the years. Landings credited with "Crap" or "Magic" by the Rapier site guys.

[NutLoose]

What does that even mean? Aside from being sexist drivel.
Eng on the line had her favourite cup that had a massive crack in it but as she brought it from home refused to part with it.

..

[NutLoose]

I still have a set of engine Engineers placards somewhere that are brand new lol.

[Dan Winterland]

My last flight in a VC10 was an air test from St Athan, but the two before that we’re getting one back from Edmonton via Bangor with a main gear leg stuck down. I don’t recall the speed we flew at or the fuel burn, but there was a limitation of no flight in icing conditions which did delay us a day crossing the Atlantic. It was slow and we were constantly asked if we knew we had a gear leg down by other aircraft.

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Yep- Belize thrice monthly unless there was something (important?) happening. Add 1982 and 1983 for definite to the years. Landings credited with "Crap" or "Magic" by the Rapier site guys.
I have to 'resemble that remark'! 'Twas Butcher Radar who marked the landings - specifically anyone returning to the UK on that 'gozomie' bird.

[haltonapp]

I did a gear down ferry in an A300 from Porto to Brussels and we could not fly the sector until we had permission from all the countries we had to fly over!

[Jhieminga]

I have to 'resemble that remark'! 'Twas Butcher Radar who marked the landings - specifically anyone returning to the UK on that 'gozomie' bird.
Like this? https://www.vc10.net/Memories/everything_raf.html#Belize

[condor17]

Chris scott , sorry bit late joining [ new knew ] .. Think HER was more like 500' AMSL . Landing Westerly came over the edge of a very tall cliff I seem to remember . Daylight flight MBA-LGW/MAN , regularly stopped for a gas 'n go in Yellow Dog Tristars . Regular HERs were often at night , 'tho occaisonally did Souda Bay in daylight .

rgds condor.

[condor17]

Spelling 0/10 new Knee..

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Like this? https://www.vc10.net/Memories/everything_raf.html#Belize

Yep! Them's the Boys. "We can (could) Hack It" :ok: