Aerobatics
 

We used to do rolls and rolls off the top but we were never brave enough to do loops. I don't know if 707s ever did loops but that was slightly before my time.

forget

Prints now available

TheVulcan

Please leave the Glenview incident alone. It is still very much in the minds of the families - some of those very young ones at the time are now teenagers, and to discuss the accident would be to open old wounds. Let them get on with their lives.

Please.

FJJP

Agreed. I'm sorry, but you will have to wait for 2008.

Don't bother to PM asking anything about the Glenview accident as I will not reply.

FJJP

This is no place for your type of sentimentality. The family survivors of an aircraft accident eventually need closure on the event just as much as we aviators but for different reasons.

The motives of ALL aviators are very clear particularly amongst the dedicated test pilots and associated crews who so often put their lives on the line for the benefit of their fellows and the millions of passengers who put trust in our careful determinations for optimum flight safety. We TPs have an enormous responsibility particularly when something goes wrong.

I personally need closure on all of the Vulcan mishaps as I once had a heavy responsibiliity for their early flight testing and clearance for their use by the RAF squadons. Did I fail in some way which may have contributed to the loss of an aircraft and crew or did the crew at Glenview make errors of judgement? Knowing the answers is the only way to prevent repeat occurrences.

So forgive us professional aviators if we upset the fringes as we strive to determine the cause of accidents/incidents as soon as possible. It is one of our ways towards prevention and enhanced safety for YOU and yours.

I have to agree with Milt. In any case, what is there (known) about Glenview that causes FJJP and Beagle such apparent discomfort?

I attended the funeral of two of the crash victims, one of whom I knew well. Can we just leave it as an embarrassing blot on the record?
I well remember being briefed by my Squadron Commander that all four engines were apparently healthy and turning at low RPM at the time of impact, according to the Board's interim report.

Look, I would ordinarily agree that lessons learned saves future lives. However, the type is no longer in service and at the time operators were fully briefed on the causes. It would serve no purpose in any terms, including flight safety, to have all the detail raked over again.

The Vulcan aerodynamics are hardly applicable in this day and age of computer designed and flown aircraft. There are no big deltas left where the lessons learned could be applied. Even if there was another big delta around, those operators would know of any circumstances that might be applied to their aircraft.

Those 'on the fringes', as Milt puts it, are REAL people who know exactly what happened [fact: I briefed one of the wives, for whom I acted as adviser and effects officer].

So let's just leave it alone - I don't want to see a nice family hurt by raking over the settled coals.

50+Ray says “Can we just leave it as an embarrassing blot on the record?” There is absolutely nothing embarrassing about an accident, despite what some may feel. People err, if indeed an accident has human error as an enabling act. Relying on human beings not to be human in a safety related business is insanity.

For some one to dip into a subject and not to expect it to be discussed warts and all, if indeed there are warts, is somewhat naïve. Attempting prohibition only guarantees the very area you wish not discussed is kept alive with rumour, speculation and innuendo, to the detriment of the memory of the very men who lost their lives in the proud service of their country.

I’ve never quite understood the British penchant for secrecy. British Airways’ commercial Sikorsky S-61 helicopter G-BEON crashed in the southern Celtic Sea when en route from Penzance to the St Mary’s, Isles of Scilly in thick fog. The report investigating the incident is held at the National Archives. It is protected under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 until 1 January 2016. Why in the world would a civil accident be subject to such protection?

Interestingly FJJP you said the same in the April 2004 thread on this subject.

Anorak Warning
 

Now, for once, I am stuck for an answer.

We know the 301 series mk 2s were intended to be fitted for Skybolt. Skybolt was cancelled early on and the final batch of Mk 2/301 XM645-657 were delivered from 1963.

Now the question. Did this last batch of Mk 2s have the Skybolt nipples?

Yes. XM645 on delivery to Coningsby.

http://www.avrovulcan.org.uk/crown_c..._coningsby.jpg

:)






.

Probably stating the obvious but the twin points were common to that entire Batch. XM645 completed 10 MAR 64 to XM657 completed 14 JAN 65.

DISCLAIMER

Any adverts showing against this post are nothing to do with me.

GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU,
Looks like only the last couple of posts are "adorned" with adverts.
Once your post moves up in the "queue", they disappear. So I wouldn't bother with the disclaimer. Everybody gets tarred a moment with the same brush.

And to be honest, I don't mind. If it pays to keep the site up and running, that's OK with me.

BEagle and FJJP

This is a Professional Pilots' Network within which most members should be concerned with Aviation Development, Aircrew Proficiency and Safety of all aspects of flight.

You are ignoring one of the cardinal rules of flight.
LEARN FROM THE MISTAKES OF OTHERS. YOU WON'T LIVE LONG ENOUGH TO MAKE ALL OF THEM YOURSELF.

Your attempts to cover up the circumstances of the Glenview Vulcan loss arouses suspicion and a reinvigorated determination to learn of the cause/s as soon as possible. If there is a valid lesson for us then you and the RAF should have concerns about the extent and reasons for such a cover up.

The loss of another Vulcan highlighted the difficulty of control recovery from a deep stall and my own test experience confirmed a loss of pitch control at a Mach no. beyond the released flight envelope.

We ageing TPs rapidly developed a mind set directed at flight safety when we recognised our unusually high chop rate. Currently there is an international project to establish and publish detailed safety considerations for all pre flight aspects of flight testing. Fortunately also, developing computer programs are able to almost eliminate the unknowns which the last generation of TPs were so often tasked to investigate.

Milt - I don't really want to delete this thread, but I will do so if you can't just let this go.

There is NOTHING to be learned and if you are really interested, you can wait until the 30 year rule date comes along in 2008.

Milt,

There is no cover up - those that could have benefitted from knowledge of the causes did just that; what I am keen to do is to stop re-opening old wounds for the families left behind. Time heals, but to rake over the coals opens the wounds.

There were no lessons to be learned for the flight testing fraternity - they know all about it already.

I don't want Beags to bin this thread because there is some good stuff in it, so please don't push it...

FJJP

I very much go along with FJJP.
There is too much good (and nice!) stuff here to have the whole thread binned.
And I think a lot of people would be mightlily upset having to try and archive 48 pages of a thread (plus the photos) before it disappears into Internet limbo.
I would have thought that....
- issues like this could and should have been settled (or fought out....) through PMs, rather than polluting a valid thread,
- a moderator could and should by now have choked off this futile part of the discussion, not by locking or deleting the thread, but simply by posting a message of explanation, then deleting (or occasionally editing for continuity) the current batch of offending posts.
BTW I'm a moderator on another site so I know it can be done. Not a moderator here, but my fingers were itching..... :ugh: :ugh: