Vulcan tried to escape from Wellesbourne, 16th Sept 2022
Did they use full power??
I seem to remember that taking off with full power in a ‘light ‘ Vulcan was very exiting!
The acceleration was enormous and V rotate came up very quickly!
Below a certain AUW 85 % thrust was used for t/o.
Why were the air brakes not deployed ?
(Hazy memory recalls a Hunter going into the water at Gib doing brake checks- in the 70s ??)
I seem to remember that taking off with full power in a ‘light ‘ Vulcan was very exiting!
The acceleration was enormous and V rotate came up very quickly!
Below a certain AUW 85 % thrust was used for t/o.
Why were the air brakes not deployed ?
(Hazy memory recalls a Hunter going into the water at Gib doing brake checks- in the 70s ??)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: East Anglia
Age: 76
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'(Hazy memory recalls a Hunter going into the water at Gib doing brake checks- in the 70s ??)'
Not quite right - he narrowly managed to avoid a dip in the harbour by selecting the undercarriage up on the emergency override system and remained on the runway edge - just.. He was indeed doing a brake check following a brake change. His first run was on the westerly runway followed by a return run on the easterly. He then decided to do one more run 'just to be sure' . Now those of you that know the Hunter will know that a) it did not have maxarets and b) it was notorious for brake fade. The outcome was thus no surprise! From memory this was in 1977 as the detachment finished after 12 years in 1978.
Not quite right - he narrowly managed to avoid a dip in the harbour by selecting the undercarriage up on the emergency override system and remained on the runway edge - just.. He was indeed doing a brake check following a brake change. His first run was on the westerly runway followed by a return run on the easterly. He then decided to do one more run 'just to be sure' . Now those of you that know the Hunter will know that a) it did not have maxarets and b) it was notorious for brake fade. The outcome was thus no surprise! From memory this was in 1977 as the detachment finished after 12 years in 1978.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: East Anglia
Age: 76
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sycamore
nip, the Hunter does have `maxarets`,or at least the ones I worked on at Halton,and later flew,had them....
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips
There's an interesting video on YT entitled Recovering Vulcan XM655 At Wellesbourne Airfield...it's about 20+mins long. I can't post a link because I'm a little uncertain as to copyright......however, there are some very "interesting " sub titles and commentary....."Green Flag " get a mention, as does...gas pipe...the weight is stated as 50 tons and those on board "get mentioned "...
Last edited by Diff Tail Shim; 23rd Sep 2022 at 16:26.
Originally Posted by mahogany bob
Did they use full power??
I seem to remember that taking off with full power in a ‘light ‘ Vulcan was very exiting!
The acceleration was enormous and V rotate came up very quickly!
Below a certain AUW 85 % thrust was used for t/o.
Why were the air brakes not deployed ?
(Hazy memory recalls a Hunter going into the water at Gib doing brake checks- in the 70s ??)
I seem to remember that taking off with full power in a ‘light ‘ Vulcan was very exiting!
The acceleration was enormous and V rotate came up very quickly!
Below a certain AUW 85 % thrust was used for t/o.
Why were the air brakes not deployed ?
(Hazy memory recalls a Hunter going into the water at Gib doing brake checks- in the 70s ??)
Full power was always used in the Vulcan for take-off; a 4-eng go-around normally required 80% thrust; a 2-eng go-around required 93%. In a 200-ser aircraft anything more than 93% would cause the howl, particularly it the throttles were opened briskly at low speed....
300-ser aircraft were de-rated until the South Atlantic campaign, so didn't howl. The 'cruise' limit setting was then the same as the 'take-off' limit setting for 200-ser aircraft and 300-ser were always flown in 'cruise'. But those who had flown them years earlier when full power was available advised that the howl they made would shake Lincoln cathedral!
Anyway, '655 is now back on the pan with fully serviceable brakes and steering. At present there is no suggestion that there won't be any future taxy runs.
300-ser aircraft were de-rated until the South Atlantic campaign, so didn't howl. The 'cruise' limit setting was then the same as the 'take-off' limit setting for 200-ser aircraft and 300-ser were always flown in 'cruise'. But those who had flown them years earlier when full power was available advised that the howl they made would shake Lincoln cathedral!
Anyway, '655 is now back on the pan with fully serviceable brakes and steering. At present there is no suggestion that there won't be any future taxy runs.
Last edited by BEagle; 24th Sep 2022 at 15:18.
Beagle, how right you are regarding 300-ser. aircraft in "cruise". The "cruise/take-off" limiting switch (yes -switch! ) was mounted on the throttle quadrant and wire locked in "cruise". I do remember, however, when giving displays overseas with friendly crew chiefs, that frequently the wire locking was "broken" and the switch was in the take-off position. Who was I to change it?!!! glad 655 is now "S", many happy memories! Bill
Originally Posted by Bill Macgillivray
Beagle, how right you are regarding 300-ser. aircraft in "cruise". The "cruise/take-off" limiting switch (yes -switch! ) was mounted on the throttle quadrant and wire locked in "cruise". I do remember, however, when giving displays overseas with friendly crew chiefs, that frequently the wire locking was "broken" and the switch was in the take-off position. Who was I to change it?!!! glad 655 is now "S", many happy memories! Bill
Happy days
YS
Last edited by Yellow Sun; 25th Sep 2022 at 16:46.
Thought police antagonist
Originally Posted by GrahamO
Back where it should be - nothing obvious in the way of damage.
However, watch the arrival of the aircraft on YT at Wellesbourne and note the stopping distance along with the aircraft taxiing clear...now I don't know what the landing speed / weight would have been on the day, plus, it had five crew on board, but compare the safe arrival..... to the fast taxi event....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
I'd have thought that 3-engined taxy runs might be a tad safer. 
Originally Posted by hurn
Depends. A four engined taxi run at low speed would be safer than a 3 engined taxi run at high speed.
