Tornado ADV
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Stoke
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tornado ADV
Can anyone confirm or deny the old story of Tornado ADV's needing to use re-heat to keep up with Bears? I know that the Tornado engines and airframe were designed to goo whoosh at very low levels but it still sounds unlikely to me that they couldn't keep up with a Bear at high altitude on dry thrust alone.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Certainly even the BAC 'Frightening' was well on the back of the drag curve at times with the Bears, although the only time I had to use reheat in a 'real aeroplane' 
at an 'odd time' was whilst tanking at high level due to Italian ATC restrictions.
at an 'odd time' was whilst tanking at high level due to Italian ATC restrictions.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Bear had (has) such a wide speed range it was very difficult to stay close both slow and fast. Trying to stay with a slow one in a VC10, particularly a K2 with its less efficient wing, was tricky and the Bear could open up those incredibly noisy engines and accelerate very rapidly, sometimes also descending into cloud. I suspect that would be when the Tornado struggled.They took no notice of appropriate flt levels, often crossing airways close to civil traffic. Good sport though.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am struggling to recall the name of the pilot, RCAF on 42 Sqn, who was shadowing a Bear which decided to depart in the vertical and turn away. The Mighty Hunter was unable to match the climb performance but managed to turn inside, roll, and get his A-A piccies, before nose down and recover of airspeed.
Did the slow ADV fly with one in min burner just to give that extra burst of power if necessary?
Did the slow ADV fly with one in min burner just to give that extra burst of power if necessary?
I recall moving around a Bear, in a Victor K2, in loose formation (taking pictures for the int boys) and he didn't seem to be travelling at all slowly. Could clearly hear the hum of the turboprops, even with a helmet on!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Aviation is never simple else we would not have accidents. With combat aircraft the combat starts at the specification stages.
The colour break (white underside) on 141 emphasises the wing angle of incidence....
It looks the same on the original photo (not publisjed in any book, incidentally) - and the effect of camouflage is to break up the shape and confuse - see if you can tell which is the left wing tip and which is the left tailplane.
Taken by some mate in the F4 on our right wing - not the world's best photographic platform!
This was in the days when we suggested to the boss that we wrote and thanked the Sovs for all the formation practice they were giving us - far more than we were getting VC10K/VC10K!
It looks the same on the original photo (not publisjed in any book, incidentally) - and the effect of camouflage is to break up the shape and confuse - see if you can tell which is the left wing tip and which is the left tailplane.
Taken by some mate in the F4 on our right wing - not the world's best photographic platform!
This was in the days when we suggested to the boss that we wrote and thanked the Sovs for all the formation practice they were giving us - far more than we were getting VC10K/VC10K!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrBernoulli
I agree the Bears were usually rumbling along at a fair speed, around 260kts maybe, but on occasions they would deliberately make life difficult for us by varying the speed knowing it would cause us problems. Another trick, when there were two of them in trail was for the No2 to creep up behind us and try and sandwich us between them and then slow speed and manoeuvre.
Beags pic does look a little weird, maybe proof of the effectiveness of camouflage. I see Beags has just beaten me to it.
I agree the Bears were usually rumbling along at a fair speed, around 260kts maybe, but on occasions they would deliberately make life difficult for us by varying the speed knowing it would cause us problems. Another trick, when there were two of them in trail was for the No2 to creep up behind us and try and sandwich us between them and then slow speed and manoeuvre.
Beags pic does look a little weird, maybe proof of the effectiveness of camouflage. I see Beags has just beaten me to it.
The Answer To The Bent Jet
I have the answer...
The poor old VC-10 is bent in the middle because of the 4 lard-arsed truckie mates eating pies in the cockpit
LJ
PS Also probably why they installed 4 RR Conways in the beast...to get it off of the ground with all the pies.
The poor old VC-10 is bent in the middle because of the 4 lard-arsed truckie mates eating pies in the cockpit
LJ
PS Also probably why they installed 4 RR Conways in the beast...to get it off of the ground with all the pies.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Not too sure but it's damn cold
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No no LJ you miss the point, everything BEagle posts is witty, erudite and clearly beyond reproach.
Everything anyone else posts is just padding..........
Everything anyone else posts is just padding..........
In your case, that would certainly seem to be true....
There must a few piccies of Bears with Fag Chariots alongside?
Surely?
There must a few piccies of Bears with Fag Chariots alongside?
Surely?
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wherever I lay my headset
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the Tornado F3 (aka ADV) is an amazing plane that epitomises the concept of Air Power... it's such an awesome machine that in almost 30yrs in service it has never had to fire a shot in anger. Now you couldn't say that about the Sea Harrier could you Navaleye.
No wonder the RAF are spending so much money on its replacement!
No wonder the RAF are spending so much money on its replacement!
Worm bitten
I think you will find that the ADV has a lot less than 30yrs service, if the Frightning was chopped in '88, that makes around 18 years maximum for the ADV.
And please remember that the ADV is not a fighter, unlike the SHAR, it is a long range standoff missile carrying platform.
Now as for its replacement, as long as it flies very fast, and is very agile, who cares if it can actually shoot down anything.
The basic design of an RAF fighter is fun first, fun second and fun third.
I think you will find that the ADV has a lot less than 30yrs service, if the Frightning was chopped in '88, that makes around 18 years maximum for the ADV.
And please remember that the ADV is not a fighter, unlike the SHAR, it is a long range standoff missile carrying platform.
Now as for its replacement, as long as it flies very fast, and is very agile, who cares if it can actually shoot down anything.
The basic design of an RAF fighter is fun first, fun second and fun third.
