Lots of BAE 146 in a boneyard - shocking
If you pan right on the original picture, you come across eight straight winged aircraft which look like Grumman Abatross', although if the two aircraft parked to the north of them are Electra's, they're a bit big.
I flew the BAe146 for 19 years and only ever had to shut one engine down. Mind you, we were meticulous about climbing in TGT mode and so regulating the back end temperature.
I have heard of a bunch of Californian cowboys who just loved flying b*lls to the wall and they got through a colossal number of engines.
MMO on the BAe146-200 was 0.7M and the BAe146-300 had a limit of 0.72M. Therefore, "ops over .72M" would ensure that you are in Indian country.
Mind you, the one that entered the ground at speed after both pilots had been shot dead was apparently doing in excess of 1.0M and it was still in one piece when it hit the ground.
I have heard of a bunch of Californian cowboys who just loved flying b*lls to the wall and they got through a colossal number of engines.
MMO on the BAe146-200 was 0.7M and the BAe146-300 had a limit of 0.72M. Therefore, "ops over .72M" would ensure that you are in Indian country.
Mind you, the one that entered the ground at speed after both pilots had been shot dead was apparently doing in excess of 1.0M and it was still in one piece when it hit the ground.
Last edited by JW411; 1st Jul 2008 at 16:36.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,688
Received 340 Likes
on
186 Posts
Chevvron, I'd say they are definitely Albatrosses - the other two aircraft are Neptunes, the outboard engines are the auxillary J-34s.
Head a bit further NW and you'll see seven Starships!
Head a bit further NW and you'll see seven Starships!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411, pilgrim,
I suspect you had no experience with the -100 and early ALF 502/503 converted helicopter engines or you might agree with wikipedia:
Problems
The ALF 502 turbofans suffered from some reliability problems. The internal electronics were prone to overheating which could trigger an automatic shutdown of an engine with no option of in-flight restarting, and certain rare atmospheric conditions caused loss of engine thrust due to internal icing.[4]. In recent years, there have been cases where toxic fumes from engine oil have entered the air-conditioning system and entered the cockpit, adversely affecting the pilots.[5][6]
[edit]
But I suppose it's easier to brand everybody John Wayne who flys a three year old airplane at the BAe recommended cruise of .78 mach (IIRC.) Incidentally, Barber poles were frequently lowered by subsequent airlines on many models including the B727. After being re-skinned into a freighter, for example, MMO was lowered from .87 to .80 on some of the worst repaired birds.
These numbers to the best of my memory (don't make me look it up.)
Loved the tailbrake on the "pregnant hunchback sweet potato." We threw it out at 500 feet. It always loved ref-5 at touchdown (sssshhshhh! don't tell anybody!)
Yeeeeeehaaaawwwww!
I suspect you had no experience with the -100 and early ALF 502/503 converted helicopter engines or you might agree with wikipedia:
Problems
The ALF 502 turbofans suffered from some reliability problems. The internal electronics were prone to overheating which could trigger an automatic shutdown of an engine with no option of in-flight restarting, and certain rare atmospheric conditions caused loss of engine thrust due to internal icing.[4]. In recent years, there have been cases where toxic fumes from engine oil have entered the air-conditioning system and entered the cockpit, adversely affecting the pilots.[5][6]
[edit]
But I suppose it's easier to brand everybody John Wayne who flys a three year old airplane at the BAe recommended cruise of .78 mach (IIRC.) Incidentally, Barber poles were frequently lowered by subsequent airlines on many models including the B727. After being re-skinned into a freighter, for example, MMO was lowered from .87 to .80 on some of the worst repaired birds.
These numbers to the best of my memory (don't make me look it up.)
Loved the tailbrake on the "pregnant hunchback sweet potato." We threw it out at 500 feet. It always loved ref-5 at touchdown (sssshhshhh! don't tell anybody!)
Yeeeeeehaaaawwwww!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm kidding of course.... Just "Yanking" your chain. And maybe it was actually a .76 cruise that was marketed to us... can't remember now.
But with only a 15 degree sweep of the wing compared to 25 degrees on the 727, it just couldn't survive some American Airways speeds imho. Cruising below .72M in the LA corridor, for example, guaranteed you were going to get vectored off the airway to let everybody else by... and then it wasn't long before atc just wouldn't give you higher, they'd make you file your "canned" plan in the twenties and that would be it. Tangled up with the turboprop traffic. Stay down and slow down. Turn off and slow down. This, in my opinion was part of what made it loose favor with operators in the Wild Wild West.
But those were the days when fuel was cheap and the name of the game was to reduce your lease time. So there's a certain amount of truth to what you say. We did attempt to fly it to the MMO at first. Later we pulled it back and went out of business as the even bigger cowboy airlines rocketed by us on the airways. And I was number 28!!!!
Much of the machine was ahead of it's time. It was the quietest machine on the field, fun looking and comfortable and I would have flow it for 18 years if I had been given the chance.
It really should have been given greater exposure to U.S. markets. Too bad random route ATC capabilities were not around then. Might have been a different story.
Cheers,
pac
But with only a 15 degree sweep of the wing compared to 25 degrees on the 727, it just couldn't survive some American Airways speeds imho. Cruising below .72M in the LA corridor, for example, guaranteed you were going to get vectored off the airway to let everybody else by... and then it wasn't long before atc just wouldn't give you higher, they'd make you file your "canned" plan in the twenties and that would be it. Tangled up with the turboprop traffic. Stay down and slow down. Turn off and slow down. This, in my opinion was part of what made it loose favor with operators in the Wild Wild West.
But those were the days when fuel was cheap and the name of the game was to reduce your lease time. So there's a certain amount of truth to what you say. We did attempt to fly it to the MMO at first. Later we pulled it back and went out of business as the even bigger cowboy airlines rocketed by us on the airways. And I was number 28!!!!
Much of the machine was ahead of it's time. It was the quietest machine on the field, fun looking and comfortable and I would have flow it for 18 years if I had been given the chance.
It really should have been given greater exposure to U.S. markets. Too bad random route ATC capabilities were not around then. Might have been a different story.
Cheers,
pac
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah JW,
The -100 was shorter though. (was it a greater power to weight?) As I recall, at tight seat pitch we had 80 seats. You're probably right about the speed. Don't have my old books here so I can't look it up on this Pacific island I'm on. I just remember us setting MCT TGT on the throttle tweaker chanting "MMO!" "MMO!" clawing our way faster hoping not to get kicked off the airway in front of those Boeing hot-rodders. Avco-Lycoming (kind of a screwed up alliance, no?) finally told us our engine failure rate was caused by extended ops over .70M. A shock to us as our management pukes claimed BAe had marketed a substantially higher cruise capability to us.
But then, as an undercapitalized deregulation upstart, we didn't have the sharpest guys setting the place up. In truth, the airline was dead before it even started.
Was a lot of fun though. Young wannabe Starlets and Showgirls for flight attendants. Our retired TWA director of in flight services had a real knack for weighing the girls and putting them in stunning outfits. But boy, did they blow a lot of slides! We had to make up a little ditty for them: "Before you open the door, look at the floor."
Alas,
It was just too good to last......
(we had guys from Alaska who had operated into gravel strips at Dutch Harbor etc so the machine was fairly capable. I remember them telling me the BAe gravel kit consisted of nothing but special paint!)
The -100 was shorter though. (was it a greater power to weight?) As I recall, at tight seat pitch we had 80 seats. You're probably right about the speed. Don't have my old books here so I can't look it up on this Pacific island I'm on. I just remember us setting MCT TGT on the throttle tweaker chanting "MMO!" "MMO!" clawing our way faster hoping not to get kicked off the airway in front of those Boeing hot-rodders. Avco-Lycoming (kind of a screwed up alliance, no?) finally told us our engine failure rate was caused by extended ops over .70M. A shock to us as our management pukes claimed BAe had marketed a substantially higher cruise capability to us.
But then, as an undercapitalized deregulation upstart, we didn't have the sharpest guys setting the place up. In truth, the airline was dead before it even started.
Was a lot of fun though. Young wannabe Starlets and Showgirls for flight attendants. Our retired TWA director of in flight services had a real knack for weighing the girls and putting them in stunning outfits. But boy, did they blow a lot of slides! We had to make up a little ditty for them: "Before you open the door, look at the floor."
Alas,
It was just too good to last......
(we had guys from Alaska who had operated into gravel strips at Dutch Harbor etc so the machine was fairly capable. I remember them telling me the BAe gravel kit consisted of nothing but special paint!)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
146 youtube sink rate
Here's a landing that only the 146 could survive! (I think this sink rate might have been terminal on a B-737?)
YouTube - Very bumpy landing
YouTube - Very bumpy landing
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: 100 Group Country
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was this the airplane that took about 4 months to repair after the landing encounter?
I think the pilot was taught at the same school though.
diddy1234 re photo at #37.
XA-RTI (E2066), 3 Dec 1991. 3 eng ferry from Campeche (Mexico) to Little Rock (Ark) via Brownsville (Tex) – two days ferry due to gear/flap down, and unpressurised flight.
No 4 engine had suffered uncontained failure and damaged No 3 pylon such that an engine could not be (re)fitted. Holes in flap, wing, and cabin due to uncontained turbine blades. Tech fault – oil filter bypass repeatedly reset by maintenance without cleaning the filter – rear turbine bearing oil starvation.
Re #44,
146 Mmo 0.7 (some US ones 0.72 – different FAA regs).
RJ, IIRC, Mmo 0.73. Flight test Md 0.804
146 and RJs retrofitted with RVSM capability.
Reliability problems: ALF 502/3 had early problems with fan gearbox, and oil bearing issues. Rear bearing (4/5) retrofitted.
LF5071F engine: early FADECs had fuel control mechanical problems, some of which were sensed as electronic failures resulting in shutdowns.
XA-RTI (E2066), 3 Dec 1991. 3 eng ferry from Campeche (Mexico) to Little Rock (Ark) via Brownsville (Tex) – two days ferry due to gear/flap down, and unpressurised flight.
No 4 engine had suffered uncontained failure and damaged No 3 pylon such that an engine could not be (re)fitted. Holes in flap, wing, and cabin due to uncontained turbine blades. Tech fault – oil filter bypass repeatedly reset by maintenance without cleaning the filter – rear turbine bearing oil starvation.
Re #44,
146 Mmo 0.7 (some US ones 0.72 – different FAA regs).
RJ, IIRC, Mmo 0.73. Flight test Md 0.804
146 and RJs retrofitted with RVSM capability.
Reliability problems: ALF 502/3 had early problems with fan gearbox, and oil bearing issues. Rear bearing (4/5) retrofitted.
LF5071F engine: early FADECs had fuel control mechanical problems, some of which were sensed as electronic failures resulting in shutdowns.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is of course unfair to compare 146 to 737: it was designed to meet a STOL spec. Not BAe.'s fault if the operator chose to link long runways, or join a stream of hot rods. Just like DHC-7: no friend of Brymon doing LGW-Newquay, but try taking anything else from original, short London City - Berne, Dundee, Innsbruck.
