Engineers and pilots favourite and least favourite aeroplanes

[Mooncrest]

Which aeroplanes, in your opinions, were great from a pilot perspective but not so easy to maintain ? And vice versa. I've heard praise from both quarters for the early DC9s and 737s. Descriptions such as rugged, simple, belt and braces. Conversely, I've heard at least one pilot describe the Jetstream 41 as a pilot's aeroplane but I've worked with several engineers who were less complimentary. I haven't yet spoken to a pilot who didn't like flying the Viscount, 757 or TriStar but, again, I gather the TriStar could be a pig to maintain.

Any stories or opinions? Thankyou.

[DaveReidUK]

Time to resurrect Eric "Winkle" Brown's classic quote about an aircraft he was testing (variously attributed to the Blackburn Botha and/or the Westland Wyvern): "Access to the cockpit is difficult. It should be made impossible."

[kenparry]

The B757 has many good points, but in turbulence the ride in row zero is very poor. There seems to be a fuselage resonance which soon builds to the tea-spilling stage. The 767 does not suffer that, and is better in other ways too - e.g. more logical systems, notably hyd and pneumatic. Of the two, I much preferred the 767.

[HOVIS]

Bae ATP. Another Technical Problem.
Absolute dog toffee of an aeroplane to maintain.

[oxenos]

The B757 has many good points, but in turbulence the ride in row zero is very poor. There seems to be a fuselage resonance which soon builds to the tea-spilling stage
Never flew it, but I recall it being known as the racing snake.

[kenparry]

Yes, perhaps a reference to the high idle thrust (on the RB211) with engine anti-ice on, when it is most reluctant to slow down. Makes winter approaches interesting.

[Mooncrest]

I once knew a pilot - now deceased - who had flown various British types in his long career, including the Viscount, HS748, ATP and 146. He once said the Viscount was "a beautiful aeroplane to fly" whilst pointing at the ATP parked outside the office and essentially saying the latter type just didn't compare.

[eckhard]

The DH Dove was a delight to fly but the inverted engines made changing cylinder heads a very messy job. Other than that, I didn’t hear our engineers complaining too much.

[stevef]

Most of my engineering history has been on piston-engined aircraft, small and large. Favourites are DC3, An2, Dove and Heron. Despised are Jodels, Robins and Grumman AA5s. I wouldn't do overtime on any of them.

[Herod]

Fokker F-27 Friendship. Simple, rugged, never let you down. The original "gentleman's horseless carriage". I can't recall the engineers complaining too much either.

Alternatively, the aircraft you are currently flying (with some exceptions)

[B2N2]

DA-42 (‘06) with the original Thielert 1.7L, what an absolute delight to fly.
Gave our Head of Maintenance sleepless nights and heartburn though.
Every single later incarnation took away from that initial brilliant airplane.
A fuel hog with the Lycomings and just a hog in every aspect with the Austro’s :yuk:

[dixi188]

BAe146 from a contractor engineer's point of view. Always lots of work to keep the money rolling in.
A lot of people hated them but I loved them. Just the right size, big enough to be a proper aeroplane without too much cabin/seats/galley/IFE stuff to deal with.

[AlphaMikeTango]

I'm a short-a*** and for me the worst aircraft to get in and out off was by far the unlamented Edgar Percival EP9 - one needs to be virually double-joined and heaven help you if you needed to get out in a hurry.. The Vampire's cockpit is also cramed and untidy ... luckily I'm not too claustrophobic.
I've worked on many types but by nationality British ones were horrible - no space to get in an access hole with a normal wrist as well as a spanner. Here I refer to types such as the Spitire (airframe fuel and hydraulic systems especially) and Vampire (working on a Goblin in situ) French ones such as their helicopters were great and American ones such as C47, AT6 and even the Mustang also nice.

[Cat Techie]

Embraer 145, hardly goes wrong on my time working on them.
SAAB 2K always going tech for something.
Jetstream 41.. Jurassic, noisy and horrible to work on.

[SWBKCB]

Slightly off topic but loading containers into the belly of Lakers DC-10's and A.300's showed a certain diveregence of design philosophy - the DC-10 system was simple, rugged and mechanical. The A.300's wasn't - computerised sensors etc. Worked ok so long as all your containers were absolutely true and square.... :rolleyes:

[Pypard]

Most of my engineering history has been on piston-engined aircraft, small and large. Favourites are DC3, An2, Dove and Heron. Despised are Jodels, Robins and Grumman AA5s. I wouldn't do overtime on any of them.

So big = good; small = not so much :)

[RetiredBA/BY]

B757 was a delight. Lighter on the controls than a 76, beautifully responsive with oodles of power, RB211 535e4. Yes, it was like sitting on the end of a vibrating ruler in chop. Even easier to land than a VC 10, both had trailing trucks but the 76 had them on the wrong way round and the 75 was much simpler to operate !

[ZoltN]

The MD900 Explorer is a maintenance engineer's nightmare - requires more planned maintenance per year than any other aircraft I know, maintenance manuals are ambiguous and poorly written, spare part availability is poor. However, all pilots I know are in love with it.

I also hated to work on the B737, which is praised by many pilots, but is full of outdated systems. I was working on it together with the A320, and the contrast is huge. The latter is the most user friendly aircraft I have ever seen.

[Webby737]

Another vote for the B757 !
Generally a nice aircraft to work on.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the BAC 1-11, there was a joke that the designer's daughter must have been raped by an aircraft engineer !
I only had very limited experience working on them but I remember some bits were a bit of a nightmare to get to.
Although every pilot I ever spoke to seemed to love them.

[ericferret]

Another vote for the B757 !
Generally a nice aircraft to work on.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the BAC 1-11, there was a joke that the designer's daughter must have been raped by an aircraft engineer !
I only had very limited experience working on them but I remember some bits were a bit of a nightmare to get to.
Although every pilot I ever spoke to seemed to love them.

The Sikorsky S76. I love the stone age technology of holding the horizontal stabiliser in place with wedges.

[HOVIS]

Another vote for the B757 !
Generally a nice aircraft to work on.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the BAC 1-11, there was a joke that the designer's daughter must have been raped by an aircraft engineer !
I only had very limited experience working on them but I remember some bits were a bit of a nightmare to get to.
Although every pilot I ever spoke to seemed to love them.
Wiffle tree?
CSDS?
CASC UNIT?

Oooer! I'm having flashbacks! 😁

[oapilot]

From a pilots point of view, Saab 2000 every time. Beautiful to fly, quick and great in a crosswind. Engineers and accountants were less enthusiastic though.

[Jackjones1]

Tristar... hydraulic charging area .... dancing on ice comes to mind!!

[stilton]

B757 was a delight. Lighter on the controls than a 76, beautifully responsive with oodles of power, RB211 535e4. Yes, it was like sitting on the end of a vibrating ruler in chop. Even easier to land than a VC 10, both had trailing trucks but the 76 had them on the wrong way round and the 75 was much simpler to operate !



Interesting perspective


I found the 757, with two ailerons vs four on the 767 to be far less responsive in roll, pitch control was worse with a significant dead spot on rotation and when lowering the nose after landing


The 767 had much better handling all around with well harmonized, linear response in all axes, it also had a much better ride in turbulence. The only thing the engineers got wrong was the forward trailing main landing gear bogies which were quite unforgiving

[Tom Sawyer]

Two favourites from opposite ends of the spectrum - VC10 taught me a lot about engineering and aircraft systems back in the days when everything was mechanical based, whereas now I enjoy the A380 due to the interactivity of the maintenance systems and the amount of information available to diagnose a problem, follow it through a linked AMM and link to an MEL if required..

Not so much an aircraft I didn't like, but the P&W JT9 was a dog of an engine, particularly from the bleed system point of view. Just getting access to anything as it was usually buried below a hot bleed pipe on a turnround followed up by trying to get core cowlings closed when they were based on a baked bean tin design, if the guide arms hadn't come out of the rollers as well!

[HOVIS]

Tristar... hydraulic charging area .... dancing on ice comes to mind!!
God that brings back memories. 😁 Servicing no. 2 engine was always an interesting experience.

[Pugilistic Animus]

757...Extra airplanes
edit forgot to say my least favorite but I don't have one really, not yet at least...

[tdracer]

I've always had a soft spot for the 767 - it was the first program I worked after Boeing hired me out of college (called the 7X7 for the first year after I hired in). I also liked in as a passenger - the 2-3-2 seating in coach was great (fortunately precious few operators 8 across configuration - I did a flight test at one point on an 8 across configuration and I could barely fit in the seat (and I was fairly thin in those days).
I ended up working the 767 for a good portion of my Boeing career and never regretted it.

[Mach1Muppet]

On a General aviation platform, I had constantly seen the DHC Chipmunk as a pilot favourite, recently got to have a go at one finally and it didn't disappoint at all, it was so beautifully harmonised and rigged! Maintenance wise id have to say a PA31 in the middle of summer on a hot tarmac, never want to repeat that nearly felt like a stroke.

[Arfur Dent]

Got to give the 747-400 my vote. Beautifully harmonised controls and, according to DP Davies, very easy to fly accurately.
Very popular with pilots, engineers and passengers so what’s not to like.

[Sea Eggs]

747-400 is hands down the best to fly.

[ancientaviator62]

I worked on the Javelin, Hunter and that servicing nightmare, the Lightning. The Hunter was by far the easiest.

[staircase]

Very surprised that no one has mentioned the 3-30 - the 'shed'.

I will leave readers of this post to guess which end of question being asked it belongs to in my opinion.

[dixi188]

Wiffle tree?
CSDS?
CASC UNIT?

Oooer! I'm having flashbacks! 😁

And nearly everything held together with A102 bolts - 11/32" AF.

[Sleeve Wing]

As AA62 has mentioned military aircraft, I must go with him on the Hunter. Best aircraft of any that I ever flew and for the engineers apparently a dream. An engine change overnight was a regular occurrence unlike the Swift which I believe took about a week !.

[aeromech3]

Moments:- Trident, wire locking main oleo charge plugs, my apprentice test, deadly fast flight controls.
Viscount & HS748 Dart types, frightening night shift engine run with nut compressor ''wash! Refitting primary heat exchangers.
BAC1-11, my 1st licence, changing belly heat exchangers, working on clamps in engine stub wing (also Trident 1&3), I think, 9 of hydraulic filters in wheel well and having to look up to extract the seals but avoid Skydrol drips and that suicide main door without the handbrake type lever wedged in the flight deck. Windscreen wiper motor change. However, pilots enjoyed flying the -400, so sure, one took it under a bridge in the Bahamas and I loved it for paying off my 1st mortgage.
V.Vanguard cutting out de bonded outer skin to then rivet same shape repair patch without damaging the thinner inner skin.
L1011 bleeding the 4 hydraulic tanks without a mask, leading edge actuator, Cat 3 reinstatement checks, main oleo leaks despite spare seal carrier, the 5 pumps in rear toilet tank gummed up with blue paper, duct area overheats. Loved it as a passenger and for paying off 2nd mortgage.
B727 checking leading edge area just when the Flight Engineer thinks your finished and resets breakers and puts B pumps on, luckily my ear defends did not block the noise of the pumps going on.
B747 types flight deck main windscreen change as a line job but an otherwise lovely machine.

[ancientaviator62]

Sleeve Wing,
IIRC an engine change on the Hunter was a couple of hours due to the ability to split the fuselage at the transit joint.

[Iron Duke]

My humble opinion ....

The B747 ( Classic and -400) were fabulous aircraft to fly in every area .... however my preference will always be for the B777. Twin engine reliability, and twin engine total thrust. The last of the American "Muscle Cars" !!!

[GAZIN]

As an engineer I never liked working on the 1,11, although it was a good looking plane, same for the A300/310, often looked like a coal miner after working on the 707 JT3D's! I had a fatal attraction to the CL44 and now the MD11. As for favorites, probably the 146, 757 and 777.

[WOTME?]

Easily the worst I've ever worked on was the English Electric Lightning,doing a compressor blade check on an after flight was not very nice in the Saudi heat.
I liked the BAC 1-11 but I only ever worked on Omani Air Force and executive examples that had low hours.
As a contractor the 146/RJ and ATP were good for keeping the shekels rolling in.

[Sleeve Wing]

Sleeve Wing,
IIRC an engine change on the Hunter was a couple of hours due to the ability to split the fuselage at the transit joint.
Just so, aa62.
Off the line into the hangar in the evening, engine change, duplicate signatures then out onto the line for engine runs and tweeks.
Ready for service again for the dawn patrol. Magic. ;-)

[Capt Ecureuil]

Where as I much preferred the 757 GTi over the 767

Favourite Airliner - 747 Classic..... God bless FEs Second the 747-400

777 is a good aircraft but I fail to get the same enjoyment.

737 seemed like a tractor with wings but then for sheer excitement I give you the Shorts SD330 in ice with the rudders frozen.

Favourite little one - FLS Sprint aka Trago Mills SAH1 but then I am biased 🙂

[longer ron]

Easily the worst I've ever worked on was the English Electric Lightning,doing a compressor blade check on an after flight was not very nice in the Saudi heat.
.

I luckily managed to avoid working on Lightnings (some of my fellow ex brat chums were not so lucky :) )
A close second though must have been Harriers,when I was younger I used to relish engineering 'challenges' and quite enjoyed all those nice jobs on leaping heaps,however by the time wastospace closed down dunsfold I was definitely feeling older and when I started my final employment 'somewhere in wiltshire' I kept very quiet about my 11 years Harrier experience :cool:.
I was lucky when I graduated from Halton - i was posted to Canberras - and they were a nice simple a/c (B2 + T4) to settle into Riggering.

[Akrotiri bad boy]

I'm with you on that L Ron.
I've never been so filthy as when I riggered Harriers. A lot of work required the engine out, to take the engine out you had to take the wing off; to take the wing off you had to jack it up; to jack it up you needed four jacks; and so it went on. All this in the field!!:eek:

[Anilv]

Slightly off topic but loading containers into the belly of Lakers DC-10's and A.300's showed a certain diveregence of design philosophy - the DC-10 system was simple, rugged and mechanical. The A.300's wasn't - computerised sensors etc. Worked ok so long as all your containers were absolutely true and square.... :rolleyes:

My experience was the total opposite. The DC-10 with shuttle (shutter?) bars was a pig. The A300 was better as the LD3 had individual locks and you didn't have to load pairs (on the DC-10 if you had only one loaded LD3 you had to load another empty to provide side restraint. This was during my time with Fedex.

rgds
Anilv

[longer ron]

I'm with you on that L Ron.
I've never been so filthy as when I riggered Harriers. A lot of work required the engine out, to take the engine out you had to take the wing off; to take the wing off you had to jack it up; to jack it up you needed four jacks; and so it went on. All this in the field!!https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies/eek.gif

Indeed ABB
We always said that the wing should have been named 'Panel 1' as it had to be removed so often :)
One little job I had the 'pleasure' of doing twice was replacing the FFP (Fuel Flow Proportioner) in situ with the engine still fitted.
This job has been likened to taking your teeth out through your Ass,working under the fuselage through a small access panel with all that lovely dripping fuel and hyd fluid,you had to disconnect the fuel and hyd conns,unbolt the damn thing but could not let it drop as it would have flattened a nest of thin walled hyd pipes underneath the FFP (the FFP was a fairly heavy item LOL).
Why did I have to do it twice ? incorrect diagnosis by an electrical 'colleague',the FFP caption was on in the cockpit and I had asked him ''are you absolutely sure it is a duff FFP ?''.
Anyway the first replacement item I fitted failed mechanically (think loud clanking noise) during engine run,so I had to then fit another 'new' FFP - I wonder why I have neck and back problems :cool: ??
The true cause of the FFP caption was actually a tiny little elec relay - eventually diagnosed when it was found that the caption was still illuminated on ground runs - result one sparky off my christmas card list :)

[Uplinker]

As a pilot : the B737 - 300/400 Classics were hideous. Just awful flight decks and poor automatics.

My first commercial type; the Shed (Shorts 3-60) was a delight to fly despite looking as though it was still in its delivery box, poor thing !

BAe 146 was lovely to fly - great control and airframe feedback. Great speed-brake. Shame about the smelly socks smell of the organophosphate fumes. On turbulent approaches the servo-tab control surfaces couldn't always 'keep up' with your inputs. Did my best landing ever in a 146.

My absolute favourite aircraft though is the Airbus A-330. A beautiful, stately aircraft, and lovely to fly. Plenty of power from those huge Trents. Fantastic flight deck and really good fly-by-wire systems. Even better after I taught myself how to land it really smoothly.

A320 good too, especially after I taught myself how to use the side-stick properly.

[mahogany bob]

Definitely the Vulcan - a delight to fly - outperformed most fighters above 20000ft!

[treadigraph]

BAe 146 ... On turbulent approaches the servo-tab control surfaces couldn't always 'keep up' with your inputs. Did my best landing ever in a 146..

Was that perhaps a reason why the Crossair 146 made that heavy arrival at London City?

[Herod]

My first commercial type; the Shed (Shorts 3-60) was a delight to fly despite looking as though it was still in its delivery box, poor thing !

Yes, until it encountered icing. 30 minutes airborne, and throttles firewalled on finals.

[skianyn vannin]

Pilot here. I've flown 4 commercial types

BAe J41. First turbo prop. Fun to fly and excellent handling
BAe46 First jet. Nice handling, but quirky systems. Always seemed to be tech. Runs out of puff at higher levels, especially in icing conditions.
Boeing 737. First proper jet. Just awful.
Airbus A320 series. Definitely my favourite

Ga types. I only fly light A/C for glider towing.

Favorite 180HP Super Cub. An absolute dream to fly.

Worst, any version of the Eurofox. I absolutely despise this aeroplane.

[T54A]

I'm a short-a*** and for me the worst aircraft to get in and out off was by far the unlamented Edgar Percival EP9 - one needs to be virually double-joined and heaven help you if you needed to get out in a hurry.. The Vampire's cockpit is also cramed and untidy ... luckily I'm not too claustrophobic.
I've worked on many types but by nationality British ones were horrible - no space to get in an access hole with a normal wrist as well as a spanner. Here I refer to types such as the Spitire (airframe fuel and hydraulic systems especially) and Vampire (working on a Goblin in situ) French ones such as their helicopters were great and American ones such as C47, AT6 and even the Mustang also nice.

SAAF Museum EP9 I assume. Not too many of those floating about.

[albatross]

Those dreaded words
“A) Gain access to part.”
AKA - dismantle 25% of the airframe, remove 4 or 5 other parts plus associated wiring harness and hoses. Be prepared to work upside down and backwards in total darkness in an unventilated, claustrophobic space covered in grease and hydraulic fluid, reeking of fuel, oil, and lavatory fluids.
Then discover, after an hour or two, that the cure for the snag lays elsewhere and can easily be rectified in 5 minutes or less by replacing a switch, or the person operating same.
For giggles this should be done at night at -35C with 40Kt wind under blizzard conditions in an area frequented by famished Polar Bears or under a blazing sun on a snake infested jungle strip at +40C during a dust storm or tropical rainstorm of biblical proportions.

[Cat Techie]

The MD900 Explorer is a maintenance engineer's nightmare - requires more planned maintenance per year than any other aircraft I know, maintenance manuals are ambiguous and poorly written, spare part availability is poor. However, all pilots I know are in love with it.

I also hated to work on the B737, which is praised by many pilots, but is full of outdated systems. I was working on it together with the A320, and the contrast is huge. The latter is the most user friendly aircraft I have ever seen.

In my first days outside the military, I was a mechanic at a place that did the heavy checks on 73s and Scarebuses. The C Cert that interviewed me for the job (and our paths had crossed way before my military career) said of the two. The 73 is a Mondeo. The 320 is a Merc. Enough said.

[Cat Techie]

Time to resurrect Eric "Winkle" Brown's classic quote about an aircraft he was testing (variously attributed to the Blackburn Botha and/or the Westland Wyvern): "Access to the cockpit is difficult. It should be made impossible."

Hushkits Worst 10 British Aircraft. Sometimes a British manufacturer got it right nine times out of ten. Didn't apply to Blackburn. Actually nobody else as Chadwick, Camm and Mitchell designed some massive clunkers.

[oldpax]

Some electrical components were not easy to get at!Engine fire bottles,and worse,changing the two generators ,eack about 60 lbs each and you had to pull them from the gearbox onto your chest!Engine changes easy,tailplane actuator ,careful not to drop nuts etc as they would disappear.Still have back scars from the various protrusions underneath!Oh and wire locking on the fire bottles always got your finger ends.
Had a sabrina door blown ofonto my shin,took a bone chip out,I can still feel the dent!

[Uplinker]

Was that perhaps a reason why the Crossair 146 made that heavy arrival at London City?
Maybe, I don't recall that one. Might have been the 5° glideslope?


Yes, until it {Shorts 3-60} encountered icing. 30 minutes airborne, and throttles firewalled on finals.

Ah. Had the elevators freeze solid on a 146 as we reached cruising altitude. That focussed our minds somewhat..........

[common toad]

Aileron freezing was a routine inconvenience with the 146/RJ. Type IV fluid and buildup of residual fluid that swelled when moisture added was to blame. Other types with non-powered controls also suffered. ISTR that someone at FlyBe came within a whisker of ripping the tail off a 146 after the elevator froze up.

SHD 330/360 icing was an issue that you needed to be ahead of. Watched a fellow pilot stall a 330 on his first line trg flight - FL 70 over the Pennies, The stall was very benign. However, I did once have ALL the controls on a SHD 330 frozen up. The winterisation check to dry out the control run bearings was deemed the cause. Trimmers worked fine though. Back in the 80s it was all part of the fun…

[Arthur Bellcrank]

Lightnings were quite labour intensive, however I think the Lear Jet and Fairchild Metro were the most horrible to work on, followed by early Citations.
The Herald rudder was prone to freezing, we used to pack the lower bearing with grease 7 in a sort of pyramid so the moisture would run off.
Bae 146 engine changes paid off my mortgage.
Best to work on was F27.

[common toad]

I’m sure riggers’ of a certain age will remember the Canberra brake control unit and its near impossible wire locking. It was as if EE built the rest of the fuselage around it.

[TLDNMCL]

Some electrical components were not easy to get at!Engine fire bottles,and worse,changing the two generators ,eack about 60 lbs each and you had to pull them from the gearbox onto your chest!Engine changes easy,tailplane actuator ,careful not to drop nuts etc as they would disappear.Still have back scars from the various protrusions underneath!Oh and wire locking on the fire bottles always got your finger ends.
Had a sabrina door blown ofonto my shin,took a bone chip out,I can still feel the dent!
You forgot that bloody wheel centring splke in the main U/C bays. I think that's where I perfected my swearing skills.

[Herod]

The 146 also suffered from throttle freeze, I believe caused by water running down the pylons and freezing. On starting descent, one engine would remain at cruise setting. When it was no longer sensible to control it with differential power or rudder trim, shut it down and land on three.

[Krystal n chips]

You forgot that bloody wheel centring splke in the main U/C bays. I think that's where I perfected my swearing skills.
That's you, me, and every engineer who worked on the type then..and a special mention for the bag tanks, their internal components and the bits of waxed string..trying to locate the holes at the rear of the wing.

The Gnat..a joy to take to pieces, you could say it was modular in fact...re-assembly, not so and rigging the tailplane usually "took some considerable time"...changing the monkey puzzle in the rear cockpit...fine if you were a masochistic contortionist...if not, sadly, the RAF didn't have many osteopaths available in the hangar.

The Jag...great for first line, wheel change apart , and the circlip holding the brake unit on...never felt comfortable rotating 800kgs ish of Adour on an engine change...and another special mention for the supplier of the titanium heat shields....cut nowhere near to size and without any pilot holes.

The Lightning..only on mod. / fire integrity / repairs..which was enough !...amazed to find the fasteners on the wing were countersunk externally with nuts on the inside to retain them.

Canberra...took the nose off / refitted on 7Sqns a a few times...just unbolt and off it came. Bucc majors....just one long nightmare removing the stub wings and replacing engine spar rings.

Civilian...I may have mentioned the :mad: ATP before, closely followed by the 1.11 and the stub wing, basic replenishment, CSDU change...another piece of vintage junk.

Boeing models 73 / 74 / 75 / 76....a delight and if you liked getting dirty, and hitting JT 3's with a piece of wood and a sledgehammer, the 707 / 720 fulfilled this admirably.

Chipmunk....anything to do with the trim from the left side of the cockpit rearwards.

[common toad]

Ah yes … the Chipmunk trim cable change at the trim wheel. Simple job if you didn’t mind hanging upside down with the cockpit rail hurting your guts. Option two, sit on the cockpit floor (seat would be out) and damage your arse on the stringers. Such joy… not!

[frieghtdog2000]

So - the VC10 - lovely to fly - still remember NBO LHR at night with no Autopliots. Flight Engineer got quite good towards the end!
Then the Tri-Star - best comfort - great visibility and you could grow tomatoes in the flight deck. Eventually managed to land it with reasonable certainty.
The BAC 1-11 after the 1011 - missed the nought in between the numbers. Nice to fly bit technically a nightmare - still remember the engineer at MUC who had a lump hammer to get the CSDS going.
Then the 757/767 with lots of mentions on the forum - different but both delightful in their own way. 757 simple and the 767 a thinking man's aeroplane.
Happy days and a great career.

[longer ron]

I’m sure riggers’ of a certain age will remember the Canberra brake control unit and its near impossible wire locking. It was as if EE built the rest of the fuselage around it.

The T4 wasn't too bad as you could swing open the nose for access/view but the 'Bomber' version BCV was indeed diabolical for access - iirc one could either touch the damn thing (with one hand) or see the damn thing but not both at the same time.
When I was on the OCU one evening on late shift - our CGI kindly landed with the brakes 'on' (in a B2),of course he denied doing so - result BCV change and I missed a hot date with a young lady who had a penchant for wearing extremely short skirts/dresses :( (early 1970's),it seemed a loooong wait for the next date :cool:.

[Cat Techie]

The Jag...great for first line, wheel change apart , and the circlip holding the brake unit on...never felt comfortable rotating 800kgs ish of Adour on an engine change...and another special mention for the supplier of the titanium heat shields....cut nowhere near to size and without any pilot holes..

Oh yes, the heat shields. The British made components were old age and the we cannot be bothered to make a jig attitude that the Brits had kept sheetie skilled riggers in pain forever more. Most of the painful jobs on the Jag had British undertones. I remember the drilling jig BAE came up to enlarge the frame 25 anti rotation bolt holes. Anyone that had done an ONC in mechanical engineering could shoot the idea down. My GEMS replacement made me 750 quid and paid for my HNC.

[WHBM]

Don't know about the crews, but the old Boeing 377 Stratocruiser in the 1950s was always a notable delight to the passengers, downstairs cocktail bar and everything.

However, it had R-4360 engines. These had 7-cylinder radial banks, with FOUR banks per engine, arranged in an offset spiral to try and get some cooling air to all cylinder heads. So 28 cylinders per engine, four engines, two spark plugs per engine. Done the arithmetic yet ? 228 spark plugs. There was apparently some defect that could arise (anyone know what) which required ALL the spark plugs to be changed before next flight, an event which had a regular habit of happening downroute on a weekend evening. I wonder how long it took. Overtime and night rate premiums were generous, and apparently station engineers made enough over a couple of expat years for BOAC or Pan Am to buy a house for cash when they finally returned.

[DH106]

So 28 cylinders per engine, four engines, two spark plugs per engine. Done the arithmetic yet ? 228 spark plugs.

224 surely?

[WHBM]

Oh ... um ... just keeping everyone on their toes :)

[ancientaviator62]

oldpax,
I take your point about some aspects of the Hunter servicing but anyone who worked on both the Hunter and the Lightning would always IMHO looked back very fondly on the former !

[longer ron]

Ah yes … the Chipmunk trim cable change at the trim wheel. Simple job if you didn’t mind hanging upside down with the cockpit rail hurting your guts. Option two, sit on the cockpit floor (seat would be out) and damage your arse on the stringers. Such joy… not!

I was lucky twice on Chipmunk Elev Trim snags.
The first where the pilot said that the 'trim' kept changing - he would trim and then (say) do a turn (ooer missus) and after rolling out straight and level the 'trim' would have changed (trim wheel in same posn).I had a quick look around - fitted an elevator lock in one side to check that both elevators were aligned,walked round the other side and found to my amusement/amazement that I could waggle the other elevator very easily.

Tail Cone removed and found that all the elevator flange bolts were loose (separate elevators with [4 or 6 bolt ?] flange at each inboard end of torque tube).No other damage found so 'snag' cured by retightening flange bolts with elev lock fitted both sides.
I always preferred a tight flange :cool:
The 2nd where the trim cable tension kept varying,this one caused by a crack/split on the tab operating bracket hole where the cable end attached to - took me a while to find that one LOL.

[India Four Two]

However, it had R-4360 engines. These had 7-cylinder radial banks, with FOUR banks per engine, arranged in an offset spiral to try and get some cooling air to all cylinder heads.

In the Planes of Fame lobby, in Chino, there is a sectioned R-4360 in all its complicated glory:

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1920x1078/r4360_planes_of_fame_chino_9b67a875e48a458604a153ab7264ff5b1 f66806f.jpeg

[Asturias56]

You start to see the attraction of the jet engine..

[dixi188]

An old colleague of mine,(RIP John), worked for PanAm at Heathrow in the days of Stratocruisers. He said it was almost every night that there was a set of plugs to change and there were 225. The extra one was in a small single cylinder generator used to keep the lights on and charge the batteries.

[AlphaMikeTango]

SAAF Museum EP9 I assume. Not too many of those floating about.
indeed yes - had the "pleasure" of a flight in it years ago. Flown in some beauts of theirs - this was not one of them!

[4djd9]

Flew F-28, 737 classic, MD-88/83, A-320, 707 and 747 classic.. Best behaved, had bunks, easy to land, very easy to hand fly, stable and gentle: the 747 classic. No vices. Good fun aeroplane: the F28, but noisy cockpit, and soft landings were a rare miracle. . Spent more time on 737s than any other a/c, (11 yrs), and when I moved on, realized that I perhaps had begun to feel invulnerable. But it taught me tons, and the JT-8D never let me down. Didn¨t fly the 707 long enough to fall in love, and during the long flights the side windows were always very cold. A-320 was a challenge after so many standard yoke years. No feedback, fixed throttle positions, long checklists, horrible manuals. It was my last plane, and as with the 707 didn¨t get to enjoy it. The MD-88 cockpit was a shock after so many Boeings, Parts brought from the all the previous Douglas models, the nosewheel steering control must have come from a steam locomotive, the magnetic compass and its mirrors, and the stby airspeed which seemd to rotate the wrong way were all strange. Yet it flew beautifully, rode turbulence well, the cockpit was silent and the pilot seats (Ipeco I think) were excellent. Ended up loving the plane.

[Corrosion]

Many comments about 146/RJ, mostly same opinions from tech side. Still my all time favorite hands on type, those beasts need work to go on, but hey thats why we are there. :}
J41, not that bad from my sight. Little brother 31 was/is much worse. S2000, fine and robust a/c but lots of work.
737 CL/NG, boring workhorse. Always hated dirty-oily-wet MLG bay, only airliner i have worked which have rain in MLG bay... (water pouring in, and over you when doing something on turnaround) Very forgiving AMM/MEL, just GO. :ok:
A32x, bit boring and too much just resets. Most of the days easy for techs, most of the days...

Which is the best? It depends what you want, for lazy b*stards 737/A32x etc etc. Enthuasists,and easily bored individuals may find good points from less liked types... bring in your wrench. :E

[sangiovese.]

Best King Air. Lovely from the 90 to the 350
Worst Mitsubishi Diamond. Hands down. Horrid

[albatross]

I remember a few guys who had a very low opinion of the MU-2 both from the aviating and maintaining viewpoints. I do remember one landing and taxiing onto our ramp during a dark and stormy night after a lightning strike with the port tip-tank nearly blown off ..very large, ragged hole blown out of the tank. We were suitably impressed. The comments from the crew and paramedics aboard when they exited and saw the damage were priceless. They said the “Bang” was very loud and startling. The patient was unconscious so missed the fun. The fire dept showed up expecting to clean up any spilled fuel…there wasn’t a drop in the remnants of the tank. We completed the patient transfer to the Trauma Centre hospital in the helicopter.

[brakedwell]

The 146 also suffered from throttle freeze, I believe caused by water running down the pylons and freezing. On starting descent, one engine would remain at cruise setting. When it was no longer sensible to control it with differential power or rudder trim, shut it down and land on three.

The Argosy also had a throttle freezing problem. Armstrong Whitworth had to increase the size of the holes in wing parts that the push rods ran through.

[squidie]

If it flies, it flies.

[brakedwell]

It may be ancient, maybe it was unfashionable, but looking back in retirement I think the Avro Anson was one of the nicest aircraft I flew. I was very lucky to do more than 1000 hours on type and will value that time with fondness.

[TLDNMCL]

[QUOTE=Krystal n chips;11194056]

"The Gnat..a joy to take to pieces, you could say it was modular in fact...re-assembly, not so..."

I've never worked on the live beast but we did plenty on it during training.
Our team was tasked with a canopy removal/refit,
for such a tiny flea of a machine, it's canopy is bloody huge and is probably only second in component weight to the engine.
During the refit, the guy responsible for slinging, propping and supporting made a mess of it and it came down very hard on the cockpit rails. My other pal's task was to insert the hinge bolt(s).
He got his body out of the way before he got chopped in two, but remained trapped between canopy and rail by a fold in his overalls, smack bang in line with the gentleman's weekend sports equipment.
An inch or two closer and he would not have four grown up kids today.
It is also the only time I have seen a Scotsman too shocked to utter a meaningful string of swear words.

​

[Bill Macgillivray]

Done the fast jets, big jets and single piston and jet trainers and enjoyed them all, but have to confess that my favourite was the Skyvan in Oman (maybe it was the operating area, but just great!!)
Bill

[oldpax]

Battery changes !Worst I came across,the Hastings.Second the Shackelton.Boiling batteries on the Hunters (middle east) resulting in stripping out the radios etc and washing down with bicarb/water!

[Krystal n chips]

[QUOTE=Krystal n chips;11194056]

"The Gnat..a joy to take to pieces, you could say it was modular in fact...re-assembly, not so..."

I've never worked on the live beast but we did plenty on it during training.
Our team was tasked with a canopy removal/refit,
for such a tiny flea of a machine, it's canopy is bloody huge and is probably only second in component weight to the engine.
During the refit, the guy responsible for slinging, propping and supporting made a mess of it and it came down very hard on the cockpit rails. My other pal's task was to insert the hinge bolt(s).
He got his body out of the way before he got chopped in two, but remained trapped between canopy and rail by a fold in his overalls, smack bang in line with the gentleman's weekend sports equipment.
An inch or two closer and he would not have four grown up kids today.
It is also the only time I have seen a Scotsman too shocked to utter a meaningful string of swear words.

​

Ah, the canopy ! yep, definitely had some weight (understatement !) but you'll forgive me for saying I'm amused by your reference to slinging etc,.

Given this would be at the RAF's country spa retreat, this comes as no surprise, however, at Valley, the technique was "slightly different " as you can imagine. Four people were ideal, two to lift from the stand, one in the cockpit stood on the seat, and, the lucky "volunteer", at the rear straddling the spine. Alas, sometimes four was a luxury and two were thus employed. The technique was to lift off the stand, gently place the rear of the canopy on the wing, on a mat, with man A holding the front, whilst man B hopped on to the wing..grabbed to the rear and, in a finely honed operation, would lift whilst man A did the same ....and entered the cockpit. Thereafter, wiggle, jiggle and "clunk ! " Gnat cockpit access steps were quite good bits of ergonomic kit really;)

The canopy had another "fun" aspect. It used to craze..no surprise you'll agree, and thus "many happy hours " could be spent blending the crazing out. Enter the "Heath Robinson " device for measuring the depth left after the polishing...it would be fair to say some of the numerical values recorded may have not been entirely accurate.

[common toad]

I can’t think of an easier canopy to fit than that of the Jaguar. Was that bit from the British or French design team?

Early in the Jags service life there was a mod to replace the fuel bag tanks just behind the cockpit. The very expensive components arrived at 60 MU in their bespoke wooden crates with ample packing. Only trouble was … the component card had been stapled to the rubberised tank!

[exMudmover]

Although the early Harrier was an exhilarating machine to fly ( I managed nearly 2000hrs on it without crashing!), there were many problems. First of all the tiny cockpit was always an ergonomic slum.



The stick was an abortion, with switches and buttons stuck on in awkward positions. The early HUDs were almost unusable for I/F, the picture suffering from excessive electronic noise, and they were prone to random failures in the event of IN problems, which were common. In addition, the 1 to 5 pitch ratio of the horizon bars made it difficult to estimate pitch rates. The HUD combining glass was very large for such a small cockpit, severely compromising forward view during demanding Low Level flight, especially in poor weather. We used to do a lot of that.



As back-up the Head Down instruments were distributed at random, leading to an awkward Instrument scan pattern.



The first-generation Moving Map display ,(35mm film projected map with a large exit lens), was almost impossible to read in bright sunlight, The position given was pretty random because of frequent inaccuracies of the IN. A wise Harrier pilot did not trust the moving map.



In VSTOL flight the handling was generally fine, as long as you kept away from high AOA situations combined with yaw, which would lead to uncontrollable departure in roll, giving you just a fraction of a second to eject before the aircraft became inverted. The machine also had a nasty habit of rolling out of control during a VTO.



In conventional flight the machine was noisy, buffeting and yawing about as speed increased. High wing loading led to poor turn performance. Because of the huge elephant’s ears intakes the machine would quickly run out of steam at about 550kt IAS



Night flying was a nightmare, no part of the lighting system having been properly designed for night flying. The cockpit was poorly lit and there were no formation lights. We still had to do night formation . As an example, the IFF code lights were all individually lit by separate bulbs for each digit. If just one bulb was U/S, then you could not put in the correct code, other than by guesswork. This was a major drawback in wartime operations.



The throttle and nozzle controls were easy to use. The VSTOL trick was very handy for wartime operations.

[brakedwell]

Sound wonderful, exMudmover! I'm rather glad the last fighter I flew was the Meteor 8.

[Mogwi]

Aye but ‘‘twas great fun! 😊

Engine change in the field/onboard was rather less fun.
1. Jack the aircraft and retract the wheels.
2. Lower the fuselage onto the cradle.
3. Undo the Jesus bolts and lift the wing off.
4. Undo the myriad connections (fuel, oil, controls etc).
5. Lift out engine and place on cradle.
6. Repeat in reverse with new donk.

It always filled me with admiration watching the chaps do it. Post engine-change air test from the ship was a bit of a bum-tightener though!

Mog