Wikiposts
Search
Aviation History and Nostalgia Whether working in aviation, retired, wannabee or just plain fascinated this forum welcomes all with a love of flight.

BEA Vickers Vanguard

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 8th Aug 2021, 07:56
  #41 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: London
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe '900' refers to the Vanguard and '27' the centre fuselage.

SHT or sheet is a drawing number.

Don't know what W905 is about though.
GBOAA is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2021, 09:55
  #42 (permalink)  
QA1
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 89
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think W905 may have been a workshop designation.
QA1 is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2021, 10:12
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,822
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by QA1
I think W905 may have been a workshop designation.
No, I'm pretty sure it's an inspector's stamp number - there's no sign of any other inspection mark to verify the "Tested" status.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2021, 11:45
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Station 42
Age: 69
Posts: 1,081
Received 93 Likes on 39 Posts
Originally Posted by GBOAA
Here's the writing on my window.

The 90027 part number prefix suddenly sucked me right back to the early '80s when I worked in a bay overhauling Merchantman landing gears. 90026 = NLG, 90052 = MLG. Meanwhile I can't remember what I did last week.
Apropos of the Vanguard - Merchantman conversions, one of the Air Bridge old-timers told me that all the floorbeams were lowered by two inches as part of the modification. Anyone else chip in on that?
stevef is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2021, 16:32
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: EGLL
Posts: 559
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by stevef
The 90027 part number prefix suddenly sucked me right back to the early '80s when I worked in a bay overhauling Merchantman landing gears. 90026 = NLG, 90052 = MLG. Meanwhile I can't remember what I did last week.
Apropos of the Vanguard - Merchantman conversions, one of the Air Bridge old-timers told me that all the floorbeams were lowered by two inches as part of the modification. Anyone else chip in on that?
Same here, but Hatfield-speak, rather than Weybridge. I can still remember Trident cabin window part nrs (21-3FA305-1,IIRC), but birthdays? No chance!
G-ARZG is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2021, 16:37
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Gatters
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The BEA Vanguard Simulator cockpit section is at Bournemouth Aviation Museum and always open for a sit in,
OxfordGold is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2021, 18:11
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,822
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by stevef
Apropos of the Vanguard - Merchantman conversions, one of the Air Bridge old-timers told me that all the floorbeams were lowered by two inches as part of the modification. Anyone else chip in on that?
First time I've ever heard that. Doing so would have involved a massive amount of work and would likely have destroyed the economics of the conversion.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2022, 11:57
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Sits on Tail"

Early 70's MAN. A slight ground shudder outside the general aviation apron / BEA cargo centre. I went out of the office, to find a Merchantman with its nose facing skyward, and the tail sitting firmly on the ground. A netted loaded pallet had been pushed though the front loading door, and pushed back through the a/c. Without the foresight of a "Tail stay" to keep the a/c firmly on the ground, the loaders required an immediate change of underwear After a damage assessment, it was decided that a volunteer crew should be sought to flight the a/c at lower than normal flight level to LHR for repair. I remember a "Mega crane" being hired, with a sling being fitted to the front of the a/c in order that the nose wheel didn't come down with a bang. Did we learn from this ? as the Americans say "Hell No" The same thing happened again a week or so later, with a further Merchantman sitting on it tail on the domestic pier apron ( due to LHR diversions ). This time I think some kindly employee had removed the tail stay to use on another Merchantman..

I remember a similar problem when working at FRA with the TU134, Aeroflot would bring a loadmaster with them on the a/c and have the cargo delivered to a/c for their instruction on loading. I think the TU154 had a similar problem ?

Lance Shippey
Lance Shippey is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2022, 17:04
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: alton
Age: 71
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by stevef
Apropos of the Vanguard - Merchantman conversions, one of the Air Bridge old-timers told me that all the floorbeams were lowered by two inches as part of the modification. Anyone else chip in on that?
Bit late to the party on this old post but lowering the floor beams would have been impossible as they have to attach to the fuselage sides exactly on the joint line between the upper and lower bubbles, placing them anywhere else just wouldn't work. A more likely explanation is that the floor was raised by 2 inches when the roller floor was added on top of the existing beams.
The 90027 Sht 2339 is the Vickers part number, 900 being the Vanguard prefix, and W905 is the BEA parent workshop designation.

Richard
sandringham1 is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 10:14
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lanzarote/Butuan/Southern Yorkshire
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Ilyushin 62 had a similar problem.
Cymmon is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 13:22
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Station 42
Age: 69
Posts: 1,081
Received 93 Likes on 39 Posts
Re the lowered Merchantman floor, I've just found this Pprune Vanguard thread from 2009, entaxei's post #76. I does sound like a lot of work but it must have been worthwhile modification.

Vanguard

Quote:
I worked on the hangers for a number of years on production control, including on the Vanguard conversion, re Merchantman floor height - yes they were lowered to accommodate the size of the std containers then being used, we also had to modify the fuse structure to take the door frames and additional loading. Each conversion lasted some weeks, it was a full stripdown.

stevef is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 16:18
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,661
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 17 Posts
... one of the Air Bridge old-timers told me that all the floorbeams were lowered by two inches as part of the modification.
... lowering the floor beams would have been impossible as they have to attach to the fuselage sides exactly on the joint line between the upper and lower bubbles, placing them anywhere else just wouldn't work.
Well, the ABC Merchantman is in the museum at Brooklands, open to visitors. Would any engineer like to put their head in and say one way or the other ... ?
WHBM is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 16:49
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,822
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
I have a distant memory of doing a run-up (on all 4) on a cold night-shift at LHR around 1975 following an engine change on a Merchantman (a good exercise in putting one's faith in brakes and chocks ).

If the main deck floor had been lowered during the conversion, presumably that would have resulted in there being a step up into the flight deck. I don't recollect there being one (I'd probably have tripped up over it), but I may be mistaken about that.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 17:13
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Station 42
Age: 69
Posts: 1,081
Received 93 Likes on 39 Posts
The last time I worked on a Merchantman was about 35 years ago and I can't remember the floor structural layout but I imagine a solution to lowering beams might be to keep the existing attachment layout on the fuselage double-bubble frames but the beams themselves would have their top flanges 2" lower.
A very wide and shallow 'U' shape with the vertical flanges being attached to the frames if you like. (____________) instead of the conventional (--------------------)
Of course it might be nothing like that!
stevef is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 20:08
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,824
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
Originally Posted by Cymmon
Ilyushin 62 had a similar problem.
RAF VC10s at Brize have done it several times.
I've seen Cessna Caravans where the pilot jumps out after stopping and puts a stay in before the passengers move.

Last edited by chevvron; 20th Jan 2022 at 22:05.
chevvron is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 20:13
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dorset UK
Age: 70
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes on 12 Posts
Had an Electra on it's tail at Bournemouth, the nose wheel off the ground on a freighter BAC 1-11 and an A300. The last two rescued by rapid movement of people.
P.S. It wasn't me doing the loading.
dixi188 is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2022, 22:42
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,828
Received 271 Likes on 110 Posts
RAF VC10s at Brize have done it several times
Only once, as far as I know, due to incompetent groundcrew neglecting to check fin tank contents....
BEagle is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2022, 07:15
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: England
Age: 77
Posts: 1,196
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes on 16 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
I have a distant memory of doing a run-up (on all 4) on a cold night-shift at LHR around 1975 following an engine change on a Merchantman (a good exercise in putting one's faith in brakes and chocks ).
You'll be familiar with Stand 319, then, where the Merchantman ops were based. Most of the flights were scheduled at night. One of the grimmest was 0200 LHR-CPH-LHR. Airborne from LHR - head northeast for approx an hour towards Heligoland, turn left a few degrees - head northeast for approx another hour - land CPH. Hour turnround then back along the same route.




In Feb 1972 G-APED and 'EF were temporarily based in Malta for circuit training for pilots converting onto the Vanguard/Merchantman. While at Luqa one of the Tynes on one of these aircraft dumped all its engine oil through a failed seal on its prop hub. I took this pic during the prop change (possibly repair rather than replacement - it looks like a prop hub lying on the trolley).

A description of Merchantman ops can be found in the book 'The Damocles Plot'.

Discorde is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2022, 07:16
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: England
Age: 77
Posts: 1,196
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes on 16 Posts
Besides the cargo door and ball-bearing cabin floor another tech difference on the Merch was the pressurisation system, supplied only by a compressor on eng 3, rather than 2 and 3 on the Vanguard, presumably to reduce maintenance costs or fuel burn or both. So an inflight shut down of eng 3 would also require donning O2 masks.

On arrival on stand it was standard practice to shut down engines 1, 2, and 3 but leave 4 running until the cargo door had been opened by one of the pilots, presumably to reduce loads on the battery before the GPU was plugged in.
Discorde is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2022, 08:31
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,661
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
I have a distant memory of doing a run-up (on all 4) on a cold night-shift at LHR around 1975 following an engine change on a Merchantman (a good exercise in putting one's faith in brakes and chocks
Though presumably with the prop blades fully feathered, so you're not going anywhere.

Unlike a jet engine test - particularly the Comet at LHR just a few years before you, which suddenly lunged forward as Viscount chocks had been incorrectly used on it, striking the hangar doors in front of it and bringing them down on the tail of G-ARPI which happened to be inside. Poor old Papa India, not its first mishap (it also was the aircraft which lost its tail in the Ambassador accident), and not its last, being of course the subsequent Staines accident aircraft. I believe an initial investigation was to thoroughly check its multiple repairs to be sure that they had nothing to do with the accident.

Meanwhile, at the same time I was at university in Edinburgh. This was before the current main runway was opened, when 12/30 was the main runway. Crosswind to the prevailing wind and not too long. The airport authority and BA said that Tridents were impossible on it, and the Vanguard had only a limited life left, which was a principal justification in the early 1970s for the new runway. However, once approved Tridents were slowly filtered in, and had fully taken over well before the new runway opened. I think the last BA passenger Vanguard flight was in summer 1974, actually only just from BEA into the BA era by a matter of weeks (did the passenger aircraft even ever get BA titles ?). Anyway, up at Edinburgh Castle in the city centre, about 6 or 7 miles from the airport, you could quite readily hear on a summer evening a Vanguard at the airport, particularly manoeuvring on the ramp. It was the only such aircraft you could hear. Once I was out there, at the old terminal on the eastern side. A Vanguard came in and swung round, no airbridges then, and the noise inside the terminal building was quite deafening. Just what was it about them, engines or the square-bladed De Havilland props (I suspect the latter). For anyone who remembers its contemporary the Britannia (Dowty props), the noise difference was extraordinary.
WHBM is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.