Vulcan To Fly Again
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Burton
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote from hairyclameater
"Did anyone seriously push for a Bucc to fly again?"
Well HHA up at Scampton are trying to get a Bucc flying in the Uk again.
They have XX885 and have put it on the civil register as G-HHAA.
The project is going well but nothing is certain yet.
"Did anyone seriously push for a Bucc to fly again?"
Well HHA up at Scampton are trying to get a Bucc flying in the Uk again.
They have XX885 and have put it on the civil register as G-HHAA.
The project is going well but nothing is certain yet.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lichfield UK
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats great to know about the HHA efforts but that appears to be a low key, long term project, i.e. little publicity like the Vulcan crowd. Have'nt seen anything mentioned on the 'show circuit or via web sites, spam flyers to web -zines, that kinda thing. I'm sure we would all like to see a brick flying again - but if you dont know 'bout it, you cant help!
Great memories of the last Bucc to leave the UK - XW986 from Kemble
link
http://www.f4aviation.co.uk/Hangar/2002/bucc/bucc.htm
Great memories of the last Bucc to leave the UK - XW986 from Kemble
link
http://www.f4aviation.co.uk/Hangar/2002/bucc/bucc.htm
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northants, UK
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a rather different situation to the Vulcan - not nearly as expensive, and my impression is the CAA are much more receptive to the idea (as two Buccs have already flown for test/ferry flights in civilians hands albeit only briefly before being exported to SA).
I'm sure if HHA were running into the sort of problems with approval and finance that the Vulcan guys had, they'd be asking for help but at the moment they just seem to be quietly getting on with it and making good progress.
They would appreciate leads on additional spares - particularly wheels and engines - though, as you can never have enough!
I'm sure if HHA were running into the sort of problems with approval and finance that the Vulcan guys had, they'd be asking for help but at the moment they just seem to be quietly getting on with it and making good progress.
They would appreciate leads on additional spares - particularly wheels and engines - though, as you can never have enough!
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pessimists who say that the Vulcan will never fly again quote ‘the complexity of the aircraft’. Sure, it was complex when it was in front-line service, but to fly at air displays?
What systems could be disabled, removed, capped off, whatever and thus simplify the whole exercise. Presumably the pressurisation and conditioning system won’t ever be needed again - there goes a half ton of bleed valves and piping. And with no pressurisation then door seals etc, with half perished rubber, aren’t critical. Apart from an Intercomm and VHF no ‘avionics’ are needed – GPS will get the aircraft anywhere it needs to be.
There’s no reason to carry rear crew members, and both pilots would, presumably, have serviceable ejector seats. The alternators and DC can be brought on line by the crew chief after start so there’s no reason for anyone at the AEO’s station. No further activity needed from there - or am I wrong on this one?
Landing gear? I wouldn’t have thought this was beyond full scale maintenance today. I doubt if the required O rings and seals have changed much.
So, apart from engines and engine driven accessories which I believe are a’plenty, what other ‘major’ items does this leave.
I’d imagine that the PFCU’s (Powered Flying Control Units) are the problem. These are unique to the Vulcan, manufactured, I think, by Boulton Paul – no longer around.
Is there anyone there who could give a thumb nail sketch of what the master plan might be?
What systems could be disabled, removed, capped off, whatever and thus simplify the whole exercise. Presumably the pressurisation and conditioning system won’t ever be needed again - there goes a half ton of bleed valves and piping. And with no pressurisation then door seals etc, with half perished rubber, aren’t critical. Apart from an Intercomm and VHF no ‘avionics’ are needed – GPS will get the aircraft anywhere it needs to be.
There’s no reason to carry rear crew members, and both pilots would, presumably, have serviceable ejector seats. The alternators and DC can be brought on line by the crew chief after start so there’s no reason for anyone at the AEO’s station. No further activity needed from there - or am I wrong on this one?
Landing gear? I wouldn’t have thought this was beyond full scale maintenance today. I doubt if the required O rings and seals have changed much.
So, apart from engines and engine driven accessories which I believe are a’plenty, what other ‘major’ items does this leave.
I’d imagine that the PFCU’s (Powered Flying Control Units) are the problem. These are unique to the Vulcan, manufactured, I think, by Boulton Paul – no longer around.
Is there anyone there who could give a thumb nail sketch of what the master plan might be?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
forget, I'm afraid your assertion, although a good idea, is just a bit too simplistic. Yes, there are many systems and bits of kit that would not be needed. However, to decide the kit to 'decommission', there would have to be considerable thought given to the possible deployment patterns for the future. For example, if there was the need to fly the jet in the airways structure, there would have to be the legal minimum of nav kit installed/serviced. You can't just buy a hand-held GPS and fly the Atlantic (and why not, if the US display organisers will pay!).
Similarly, the heat fatigue associated with high summer temperatures, combined with the stress of flying a display (or several in the day), would make the conditioning system essential rather than desirable. As for flying without an AEO - no sane Vulcan pilot would even start the thing without him at the panel. You must remember that the ac flew over 150% of its design life, and as such there were increasing electrical/hot air incidents not covered by the books. Latterly, many an AEO had to pour over the 'Red Book' to solve an odd fault. No, the Vulcan was designed for a full crew - not enough automation and switchery at the front to make a pilot-only operation safe. [Modern airliners are specifically designed for such ops].
I'm sure the Vulcan team will work out what not to service to keep costs/workload to a minimum. You sound optimistic about the project - good. We need more people like you with your positive frame of mind.
Regards, FJJP
Similarly, the heat fatigue associated with high summer temperatures, combined with the stress of flying a display (or several in the day), would make the conditioning system essential rather than desirable. As for flying without an AEO - no sane Vulcan pilot would even start the thing without him at the panel. You must remember that the ac flew over 150% of its design life, and as such there were increasing electrical/hot air incidents not covered by the books. Latterly, many an AEO had to pour over the 'Red Book' to solve an odd fault. No, the Vulcan was designed for a full crew - not enough automation and switchery at the front to make a pilot-only operation safe. [Modern airliners are specifically designed for such ops].
I'm sure the Vulcan team will work out what not to service to keep costs/workload to a minimum. You sound optimistic about the project - good. We need more people like you with your positive frame of mind.
Regards, FJJP
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slightly aside, but the Trident (LHR On this thread) has had a satisfactory sum spent on it by various companies including BA and was maintained for towing and ground training. However, one of the reasons for its demise is its undercarriage problems that even after replacement only some 4 years ago has been declared unsafe and is another reason for its removal.
I would be interested to know just what sort of issues the Southend Vulcan has with regard to undercarriage testing as all these problems soon mount up and despite what some brothers have stated parts and spares are not easy to come by even if you can find anyone skilled enough to make them.
I would be interested to know just what sort of issues the Southend Vulcan has with regard to undercarriage testing as all these problems soon mount up and despite what some brothers have stated parts and spares are not easy to come by even if you can find anyone skilled enough to make them.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First, to the guys and gals at Bruntingthorpe, I hope you don’t mind a third party discussion on the engineering plans for your Baby. Apologies ahead, if so…….
Thanks FJJP, but my post was intended to be simplistic; it ended by asking if there was anyone there with a thumb nail sketch of what the master plan (in redundant systems removal) might be?
I’m pretty much aware of what minimum kit is needed to put air under the wheels, but I think you’re missing a fundamental point between a front line Vulcan and XH558.
Take the electrics. A front line Vulcan needed an enormous amount of electrical power with every piece of generation running close to 100%. As a result, reliability wasn’t good. Now remove the Nav Bombing System, Electronic Counter Measures etc, from the equation, already done, and the generation systems will operate at no more than gentle idle. Reliability will rocket – but to where, we don’t know. (It would be interesting to know the electrical serviceability record of 558 during its display days versus front line. I’ll bet there was a huge improvement even over that short period.)
As to your point that you can't just buy a hand-held GPS and fly the Atlantic, there are people doing just that as I write, not in a four jet perhaps, but happily getting from A to B. In any case, I can’t see 558 going to the US. It’s being paid for with ‘non private’ funds and to send it westbound would be like sending the Tate to Times Square.
You say there’s not enough automation and switchery at the front to make a pilot-only operation safe, modern airliners are specifically designed for such ops.
Now we’re getting somewhere near the point I was trying to suggest. There’s already automatic load shedding in the electrics and, given the highly simplified electrical management of a display aircraft over a front line job, I still say there’s (probably) no need for an AEO, and certainly not a Nav Radar or Nav Plotter. Move the minimum number of switches now required to the co-pilots position, together with a modern digital status panel, replacing half a dozen steam driven dials.
You say you’re sure the Vulcan team will work out what not to service to keep costs/workload to a minimum.
I suspect this is the very point which started my train of thought. The difference between military and civil aviation thinking (and systems) is huge. Trust me, I’ve been in both camps. In one scary leap I went from servicing Vulcans with, at that time, a ten channel plug in crystal controlled Glide Slope receiver, to Triplex Autoland Tridents. The difference astonished me. There was me thinking I was moving from the sharp end of the latest technology into the backward civvy world. Wrong! Mind you, horses for courses, the Vulcan made a much better bomber than the Trident.
One (simplified) suggestion I’d make to Bruntingthorpe is this. Take on board a couple of volunteer electricians licensed on 737/757 etc. Their task, to look into low reliability Vulcan electrical parts, everything from contactors to TRU’s, and determine which of these could be replaced by current Boeing Part Number equivalents. Replacement being mainly through adapter cables/connectors, not necessarily a rewire. This would eliminate, for these parts, reliance on old steam driven dusty spares and, instead, move 558 into the huge civil parts pool. ( Comments Blacksheep?)
As to the luxury of air conditioning. When I were a lad (as were Vulcan aircrew) in Bahrein, Singapore, Darwin………….
Must go, it’s Sunday and the Memsahib’s cranky.
Thanks FJJP, but my post was intended to be simplistic; it ended by asking if there was anyone there with a thumb nail sketch of what the master plan (in redundant systems removal) might be?
I’m pretty much aware of what minimum kit is needed to put air under the wheels, but I think you’re missing a fundamental point between a front line Vulcan and XH558.
Take the electrics. A front line Vulcan needed an enormous amount of electrical power with every piece of generation running close to 100%. As a result, reliability wasn’t good. Now remove the Nav Bombing System, Electronic Counter Measures etc, from the equation, already done, and the generation systems will operate at no more than gentle idle. Reliability will rocket – but to where, we don’t know. (It would be interesting to know the electrical serviceability record of 558 during its display days versus front line. I’ll bet there was a huge improvement even over that short period.)
As to your point that you can't just buy a hand-held GPS and fly the Atlantic, there are people doing just that as I write, not in a four jet perhaps, but happily getting from A to B. In any case, I can’t see 558 going to the US. It’s being paid for with ‘non private’ funds and to send it westbound would be like sending the Tate to Times Square.
You say there’s not enough automation and switchery at the front to make a pilot-only operation safe, modern airliners are specifically designed for such ops.
Now we’re getting somewhere near the point I was trying to suggest. There’s already automatic load shedding in the electrics and, given the highly simplified electrical management of a display aircraft over a front line job, I still say there’s (probably) no need for an AEO, and certainly not a Nav Radar or Nav Plotter. Move the minimum number of switches now required to the co-pilots position, together with a modern digital status panel, replacing half a dozen steam driven dials.
You say you’re sure the Vulcan team will work out what not to service to keep costs/workload to a minimum.
I suspect this is the very point which started my train of thought. The difference between military and civil aviation thinking (and systems) is huge. Trust me, I’ve been in both camps. In one scary leap I went from servicing Vulcans with, at that time, a ten channel plug in crystal controlled Glide Slope receiver, to Triplex Autoland Tridents. The difference astonished me. There was me thinking I was moving from the sharp end of the latest technology into the backward civvy world. Wrong! Mind you, horses for courses, the Vulcan made a much better bomber than the Trident.
One (simplified) suggestion I’d make to Bruntingthorpe is this. Take on board a couple of volunteer electricians licensed on 737/757 etc. Their task, to look into low reliability Vulcan electrical parts, everything from contactors to TRU’s, and determine which of these could be replaced by current Boeing Part Number equivalents. Replacement being mainly through adapter cables/connectors, not necessarily a rewire. This would eliminate, for these parts, reliance on old steam driven dusty spares and, instead, move 558 into the huge civil parts pool. ( Comments Blacksheep?)
As to the luxury of air conditioning. When I were a lad (as were Vulcan aircrew) in Bahrein, Singapore, Darwin………….
Must go, it’s Sunday and the Memsahib’s cranky.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm. Isolating redundant systems is one thing, but moving switchery and replacing instrumentation is surely something else. The CAA may grant flight status to the aeroplane as operated for many years by the RAF, but may take the view that such modifications constitute unknown territory both technically and operartionally.
SSD
SSD
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me give a small example of Mods that would ease the way. The retired Vulcans were delivered to their civvy owners with the early 50’s design Intercomm boxes fitted, and I’ll bet money that 558 still has the originals. They had one valve (US Toob) inside. Now Intercomm boxes, if they work at all, won’t get any attention from the ‘get it flying crew’. But Intercomm will be an unofficial MEL No-Go item. You try and find a new Toob when the Intercomm goes down half way through a display tour. You won’t do it. Now’s the time to fit a modern, but not too modern, Intercomm and new wiring. Cost of (used) parts, £700 should do it. Guaranteed availability of spares - a telephone call away. And I may even volunteer to do the mod and install drawings for free.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
forget, I take your point. However, the need for an AEO is, from my experience, absolute. For example, at an overseas base, we got airborne and a snag appeared. The first time the symptoms appeared we took action iaw the checklist, but that did not cure the fault. My highly experienced AEO diagnosed a cable fault as being the most likely explanation. This was po-poo'd by the engineers. Bits were replaced and the thing recurred once airborne again. AEO went through the red book with engineers trying to convince them that he was most likely right. Again ignored and more bits fitted. Failed again - that left only the loom to be replaced. When the new loom + lecky arrived and started work, they soon found that the original cable was virtually dust - it was one of those components that was lifed to the aircraft life, therefore never examined, serviced or replaced; and with the aircraft flown to over 150% of its planned life....
The CAA would probably have no difficulty with some modern kit being installed, provided it was done by BAe and they were fully involved throughout the design and installation. I will accept that you could probably get away without the navs; however, for reasons above - definitely not without the AEO...
As for the air conditioning, what was the figure at Akrotiri in summer? Airborne within 30 mins of cooler out or scrub??!! (It was 10 mins in Canberras). Temps in a hot-soaked cockpit measured at over 130 deg F. I rest my case!
The CAA would probably have no difficulty with some modern kit being installed, provided it was done by BAe and they were fully involved throughout the design and installation. I will accept that you could probably get away without the navs; however, for reasons above - definitely not without the AEO...
As for the air conditioning, what was the figure at Akrotiri in summer? Airborne within 30 mins of cooler out or scrub??!! (It was 10 mins in Canberras). Temps in a hot-soaked cockpit measured at over 130 deg F. I rest my case!
