- The Canberra - Unsafe in 1950, Still unsafe
Presumably they will need a T4 to train up two replacement pilots, who will presumably be required if 39 are to continue to meet their commitments. Unless withdrawal is brought forward.....
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Over there, behind that tree.
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe they still have WJ874, the "Blue One" painted up as the prototype VN799, and WH849.
When this thread has settled, maybe the moderator would consider tacking it to the end of the previous main Canberra thread. Lots of good Canberra gen and stories in that archive.
Ginseng
Glad we're now sorted, thanks for the PM.
When this thread has settled, maybe the moderator would consider tacking it to the end of the previous main Canberra thread. Lots of good Canberra gen and stories in that archive.
Ginseng
Glad we're now sorted, thanks for the PM.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All is conjecture until tyhe BoI publishes its findings
Can someone tell me whether BoI findings are published these days as a matter of course, or only in response to political pressure (as in the Chinook situation)?
I do not like this publication of reports which should be confidential to the RAF. For instance the BoI might want to recommend an immediate ban on roller landings off asymmetric approaches. But this would imply criticism of the performance of deceased aircrew, which should NOT be published.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canberra BOI
Flatus Veteranus
MoD BOI are not published as intended to be internal fact finding document passed up Command Chain. That said a copy is given to NOK and the shorter Military Aircraft Aircraft Summary is published in so far as placed in House of Commons Library and media briefed accordingly.
May all have to change under Freedom of Information Act.
MoD BOI are not published as intended to be internal fact finding document passed up Command Chain. That said a copy is given to NOK and the shorter Military Aircraft Aircraft Summary is published in so far as placed in House of Commons Library and media briefed accordingly.
May all have to change under Freedom of Information Act.
BOI and accident reports should be far more widely published than they are. Even in accidents to aircraft types with very different (uniquely military) performance and handling characteristics there may be relevant lessons for us 'lesser mortals' who fly less exalted aircraft types. In other cases, there is a more direct relevance - an accident to a Canberra is of relevance to civilian Canberra and Meteor operators, and perhaps to those who operate aircraft like the 737 and perhaps to the operators of smaller, lighter twins. An accident to a Grob 115...... you get the idea.
Without being too insensitive, saving the 'feelings' of deceased aircrew who may be implicitely criticised in such reports should surely be secondary to the aim of saving the lives of other aircrew.
Can you imagine the howls of protest if civilian accident reports were hushed up in the way you suggest? And rightly so.
Without being too insensitive, saving the 'feelings' of deceased aircrew who may be implicitely criticised in such reports should surely be secondary to the aim of saving the lives of other aircrew.
Can you imagine the howls of protest if civilian accident reports were hushed up in the way you suggest? And rightly so.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
Last time i looked there are many reasons as to why BOI findings SHOULD NOT be published for all to read hence why they are RESTRICTED... should have guessed that a journo would only be interested in nothing less than a story.
"Without being too insensitive, saving the 'feelings' of deceased aircrew who may be implicitely criticised in such reports should surely be secondary to the aim of saving the lives of other aircrew."
Yes like other RAF aircrew...oh the very people the documents get seen by...I feel your swamp is calling you!
"Without being too insensitive, saving the 'feelings' of deceased aircrew who may be implicitely criticised in such reports should surely be secondary to the aim of saving the lives of other aircrew."
Yes like other RAF aircrew...oh the very people the documents get seen by...I feel your swamp is calling you!
Duck,
Why don't you grow up, or learn to read. Or preferably both.
By the time a BOI report is published, there is no story for the kind of journo you clearly despise, and they wouldn't be interested in that level of detail, or be able to interpret it, anyway. I'm sure that most of the trade and specialist press journos get to see them, probably before you do.
And in any case, I was speaking as an aviator, not as a journo. Understanding the causes of accidents to military aircraft may well be as useful to me as a pilot, as understanding the causes of civil accidents. There are also a number of Canberra operators worldwide, who would certainly benefit from being able to read this report, when it comes out.
I say again (as you were clearly too incensed or too dim to see it first time around): "there may be relevant lessons for us 'lesser mortals' who fly less exalted aircraft types. In other cases, there is a more direct relevance - an accident to a Canberra is of relevance to civilian Canberra and Meteor operators, and perhaps to those who operate aircraft like the 737 and perhaps to the operators of smaller, lighter twins."
Compromising safety in the spurious interests of security is not on (and actually it's not about security, it's about defending reputations and preventing embarrassment).
Best wishes from the swamp.
Why don't you grow up, or learn to read. Or preferably both.
By the time a BOI report is published, there is no story for the kind of journo you clearly despise, and they wouldn't be interested in that level of detail, or be able to interpret it, anyway. I'm sure that most of the trade and specialist press journos get to see them, probably before you do.
And in any case, I was speaking as an aviator, not as a journo. Understanding the causes of accidents to military aircraft may well be as useful to me as a pilot, as understanding the causes of civil accidents. There are also a number of Canberra operators worldwide, who would certainly benefit from being able to read this report, when it comes out.
I say again (as you were clearly too incensed or too dim to see it first time around): "there may be relevant lessons for us 'lesser mortals' who fly less exalted aircraft types. In other cases, there is a more direct relevance - an accident to a Canberra is of relevance to civilian Canberra and Meteor operators, and perhaps to those who operate aircraft like the 737 and perhaps to the operators of smaller, lighter twins."
Compromising safety in the spurious interests of security is not on (and actually it's not about security, it's about defending reputations and preventing embarrassment).
Best wishes from the swamp.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko's points about the possible benefits of wider dissemination of BOI reports are valid but one has to remember that RAF BOIs are in-house enquiries and obtain information under special rules of priviledge as a result. If they were to be released to the wider public I doubt that the evidence they seek would be so freely given.
If the information is to be given to the public it should be obtained by an independent body and the evidence given would not be obtained in-house under confidentiality rules. I suspect the end result would be detrimental to the truth.
If the information is to be given to the public it should be obtained by an independent body and the evidence given would not be obtained in-house under confidentiality rules. I suspect the end result would be detrimental to the truth.
Was it not the case some time ago that summaries of BOI reports were carried in some of the monthly aviation mags? I am sure I remember them being there and suddenly not being there.
From a professional point of view, FOI legislation both European and domestic will make it virtualy impossible to keep these things out of sight for long, along with a whole host of info currently 'restricted'.
Is Air Clues still restricted?
From a professional point of view, FOI legislation both European and domestic will make it virtualy impossible to keep these things out of sight for long, along with a whole host of info currently 'restricted'.
Is Air Clues still restricted?
'Does Air Clues still exist?' would be a more apposite query.
The 'purple-isation' (
) of flight safety led to the retirement of Wg Cdr Spry and the publication of a new glossy called 'Aviate' - which I keep mistaking for a Saga holidays brochure.
You can access said journal via the MoD website, but it helpfully only provides pdf documents of the front cover and index pages.
The 'purple-isation' (
) of flight safety led to the retirement of Wg Cdr Spry and the publication of a new glossy called 'Aviate' - which I keep mistaking for a Saga holidays brochure. You can access said journal via the MoD website, but it helpfully only provides pdf documents of the front cover and index pages.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my day the Rules of Procedure for BoIs, laid down in MAFL and QRs, were aimed at a "quick and dirty" exposure of causes of an accident, allocation of blame, and recommendations for a "quick fix". They played merry hell with the normal rules of evidence applied elsewhere in the courts. "Heresay" was admissible, witnesses could be compelled to answer possibly incriminating questions etc, etc. In recognition of this, evidence at BoIs could not be used in any subsequent legal action . The proceedings were usually classified Confidential under the OSA, and so untested evidence could not be used by the media to impugn the characters of witnesses. To the best of my knowledge the findings of the BoI on the Heathrow Vulcan tragedy have never been released. I think that was a healthy state of affairs and regret that it has been allowed to lapse.
Archimedes,
Air Clues no more?
Wg Cdr Spry no more........................................................ ....
How on earth is that progress?
Said Wg Cdr was the first 'big wig' in HMFC I ever openly clashed with, via the letters page of Air Clues, good fun at the time.
Air Clues no more?
Wg Cdr Spry no more........................................................ ....
How on earth is that progress?
Said Wg Cdr was the first 'big wig' in HMFC I ever openly clashed with, via the letters page of Air Clues, good fun at the time.
Some helpful input on BOIs from Soddim and especially Flatus.
Thanks chaps.
But surely the answer is to release the BOI in a form in which the confidentiality of witnesses is ensured, and in which caveats are given where evidence may be 'untested' to some extent.
A blanket ban on publication serves no flight safety interest at all.
I'm also concerned as to whether the secrecy of a BOI report is more likely to protect the reputations of the crew (by keeping any blame out of the public arena - as perhaps is the case in the Harry Broadhurst Heathrow Vulcan incident?) or to allow an unwarranted attack on their reputations (as arguably happened in the Chinook Mull of Kintyre crash).
Someone once said that (especially if the pilot was killed, and therefore wasn't there to answer back!) it was always possible to attribute any accident to 'pilot error'. If nothing else it was an error to get out of bed that morning.
Thanks chaps.
But surely the answer is to release the BOI in a form in which the confidentiality of witnesses is ensured, and in which caveats are given where evidence may be 'untested' to some extent.
A blanket ban on publication serves no flight safety interest at all.
I'm also concerned as to whether the secrecy of a BOI report is more likely to protect the reputations of the crew (by keeping any blame out of the public arena - as perhaps is the case in the Harry Broadhurst Heathrow Vulcan incident?) or to allow an unwarranted attack on their reputations (as arguably happened in the Chinook Mull of Kintyre crash).
Someone once said that (especially if the pilot was killed, and therefore wasn't there to answer back!) it was always possible to attribute any accident to 'pilot error'. If nothing else it was an error to get out of bed that morning.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canberra Australia
Posts: 1,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
828e
You described the Canberra as 'dodgy'. It's like giving a dog a bad name and I am reluctant to discredit it that much.
Most Canberra pilots will have a soft spot for the old girl. She was way ahead of her time and missed out on some of the later evolutionary advances in design and materials.
I liked the control harmony and control forces, her stabilities and an outstanding performer in her day
Don't know why I am remembering the Canberra as a ' her' as some of the variants became quite masculine such as the BI 6 and the B8. Didn't fly the PRs. Might make an interesting survey to get votes on particular types as having male or female personalities.
So Canberras are generally fondly remembered.
But as has been mentioned in the thread she had/has some rough edges that could bite the unwary and even catch out those not familiar with the sensitivity of the engines.
Given her time over again with present know-how and hindsight she would undoubtedly have a redesigned fin and rudder. There lay her greatest ability to bite and bite hard. When heavily asymmetric the fin has inadequate area and authority to prevent fin stalling at higher speeds than would be acceptable for current criteria. Furthermore there were no discernable cues available to the pilot that the fin may be about to stall such as a buffeting felt from the rudder. And when the fin did stall it unloaded dramatically resulting in rapid yaw which had you on your back in a hurry mostly before you had time to pull thrust from the live engine.
Her other major problems were the engines which had variable inlet guide vanes to a compressor that operated too close to surging/blade stalling. There were two areas, wide apart in their performance envelope, where the engines operated close to critical. One was during maximum acceleration under the control of a hard to adjust acceleration control unit so go rounds could be a bit twitchy/iffy when the engines needed some nursing to keep them aligned particularly if you were demanding thrust in a hurry. Engine misalignment ended up causing a fair share of misadventure.
The engines at high altitude and at the colder upper air temperatures over the world's tropics would have the compressor blades too close to the stall again. There may have been a particular compressor stage which was worse than the others but I don't think the particular stage was ever determined. A little flow disturbance and bang - the compressor would unload and the fires would mostly go out. Sometimes the resulting yaw disturbance would surge the other side too. If you were not quick with a hot relight then it meant a descent down towards 20,000 ft to effect a relight. The high altitude compressor surge remains with more modern engines. The surge boundary for a particular engine is usually determined to be a particular value of RPM divided by the square root of the relative temperature. Hence higher RPM and/or lower OAT takes the engine closer to a surge
All things considered I conclude that the Canberra remains a useful aircraft today and provided its limitations and vices are well recognised should continue to give good service although I am convinced it needs a sensor on the fin to warn pilots that fin stall is imminent. Could be quite a simple device.
This is regardless of the reason for the latest loss which may not have been an asymmetric occurence at all. We professionals have not yet determined the cause but consider we should be advised as soon as possible.
RAF take note of the need for a mod.
You described the Canberra as 'dodgy'. It's like giving a dog a bad name and I am reluctant to discredit it that much.
Most Canberra pilots will have a soft spot for the old girl. She was way ahead of her time and missed out on some of the later evolutionary advances in design and materials.
I liked the control harmony and control forces, her stabilities and an outstanding performer in her day
Don't know why I am remembering the Canberra as a ' her' as some of the variants became quite masculine such as the BI 6 and the B8. Didn't fly the PRs. Might make an interesting survey to get votes on particular types as having male or female personalities.
So Canberras are generally fondly remembered.
But as has been mentioned in the thread she had/has some rough edges that could bite the unwary and even catch out those not familiar with the sensitivity of the engines.
Given her time over again with present know-how and hindsight she would undoubtedly have a redesigned fin and rudder. There lay her greatest ability to bite and bite hard. When heavily asymmetric the fin has inadequate area and authority to prevent fin stalling at higher speeds than would be acceptable for current criteria. Furthermore there were no discernable cues available to the pilot that the fin may be about to stall such as a buffeting felt from the rudder. And when the fin did stall it unloaded dramatically resulting in rapid yaw which had you on your back in a hurry mostly before you had time to pull thrust from the live engine.
Her other major problems were the engines which had variable inlet guide vanes to a compressor that operated too close to surging/blade stalling. There were two areas, wide apart in their performance envelope, where the engines operated close to critical. One was during maximum acceleration under the control of a hard to adjust acceleration control unit so go rounds could be a bit twitchy/iffy when the engines needed some nursing to keep them aligned particularly if you were demanding thrust in a hurry. Engine misalignment ended up causing a fair share of misadventure.
The engines at high altitude and at the colder upper air temperatures over the world's tropics would have the compressor blades too close to the stall again. There may have been a particular compressor stage which was worse than the others but I don't think the particular stage was ever determined. A little flow disturbance and bang - the compressor would unload and the fires would mostly go out. Sometimes the resulting yaw disturbance would surge the other side too. If you were not quick with a hot relight then it meant a descent down towards 20,000 ft to effect a relight. The high altitude compressor surge remains with more modern engines. The surge boundary for a particular engine is usually determined to be a particular value of RPM divided by the square root of the relative temperature. Hence higher RPM and/or lower OAT takes the engine closer to a surge
All things considered I conclude that the Canberra remains a useful aircraft today and provided its limitations and vices are well recognised should continue to give good service although I am convinced it needs a sensor on the fin to warn pilots that fin stall is imminent. Could be quite a simple device.
This is regardless of the reason for the latest loss which may not have been an asymmetric occurence at all. We professionals have not yet determined the cause but consider we should be advised as soon as possible.
RAF take note of the need for a mod.
Last edited by Milt; 8th Sep 2004 at 13:22.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oakworth, I am sorry you felt the need to comment. The families were fully briefed as to exactly what happened. I don't need the attention [regulars to these threads will attest to that] - I felt the need to make an accurate statement to attempt to prevent continued speculation. I was there, very personally and deeply involved in the aftermath. I will make no further mention of the '91 accident.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: An Island near France
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was in the space cadets in the mid 80's I am sure we got to read BOI reports etc when we were hanging around at Halton etc waiting for our next go in a Venture. Or even on summer camps at various other places.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK, North Riding
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flatus Veteranus
The rules of evidence don't apply in a Bof I because it's not a judicial proceeding but a device to establish facts. If those facts indicate, inter alia, that there may be a disciplinary element involved, then a summary of evidence may follow where the rules of evidence do apply. The summary then forms the basis for the disposal of the case either summarily or by court martial. At least that's how it was when I did a P1 job
The rules of evidence don't apply in a Bof I because it's not a judicial proceeding but a device to establish facts. If those facts indicate, inter alia, that there may be a disciplinary element involved, then a summary of evidence may follow where the rules of evidence do apply. The summary then forms the basis for the disposal of the case either summarily or by court martial. At least that's how it was when I did a P1 job
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guern,
I imagine that what you read was the accident report rather than the findings of the board which are not normally made freely available. However, the restricted report is compiled from the boards' findings.
I imagine that what you read was the accident report rather than the findings of the board which are not normally made freely available. However, the restricted report is compiled from the boards' findings.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FJJP,
I still don't see the relevance of making a comment that rather than serve to 'shut the door' would actually prick peoples curiosity. Like you I knew all 3 crew very well. We'd better agree to disagree on this.
I still don't see the relevance of making a comment that rather than serve to 'shut the door' would actually prick peoples curiosity. Like you I knew all 3 crew very well. We'd better agree to disagree on this.