Oldest Nimrod
Registered User **
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
From: Cambridge
If you Google XV227, the first hit takes you to www.!!!!!!!!!!!!!! where there are numerous pictures of XV227 in 2003.
S_H
S_H
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: UK
Don't know how recent this info is but XV227 is listed as 'Current' on this site :-
http://www.dehavilland.ukf.net/_Nimr...odn%20list.txt
regards
CM
http://www.dehavilland.ukf.net/_Nimr...odn%20list.txt
regards
CM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
From: Bridgwater Somerset
I found it
I got this info from http://www.ukserials.com/results.php?serial=XV .It appears it is going to be a brand new MRA4. 
8002XV227Nimrod MR2To MRA4 PA-8/ZJ521
8002XV227Nimrod MR2To MRA4 PA-8/ZJ521
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: GB
Oldest Nimrod
Some info for you. XV227 had its maiden flight on 28 Jan 1969 and delivered as a Mk1 on 18 Feb 1969 to Boscombe Down where it was used in the development of armament equipment and bomb bay fuel tanks. It was delivered as a Mk 2 to Kinloss on 2 Dec 1981. It was an aircraft that was continually monitored as part of the fatigue testing programme. It was withdrawn from service approx 1 Oct 2005 in accordance with the fleet reduction plan and delivered to Woodford for conversion to MRA4, probably as PA08 (ZJ521).
Last edited by Nimman; 19th April 2007 at 20:06. Reason: Change of ac serial no
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
From: Forres
XV227
This aircraft was indeed removed from service to be used as spares recovery ( in an attempt to restock empty shelves) and subsequent conversion to MRA4. However, it's just the fuselage which is being "re-used" and will undergo a strict examination and repair scheme prior to being matched up with the new wings, as have PAs 1,2 & 3. It's worth pointing out at this juncture that the main corrosion and fatigue problems with the old jet are mainly in the wings so the use of a refurbished fuselage is not such an issue as people think. That of course is not to say that there is no corrosion on the fuselage and that yes, it has suffered from fatigue, particularly during pressurisation. The examination and repair programme is designed to rectify any of these associated problems and indeed, some extensive re-skinning work has taken place. I suspect that any sceptics would be surprised to see the final product.
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
From: Bristol Temple Meads
Pleased to hear that the "spirit" of 227 lives on in some shape and form. I had heard there had been a fire incident with it at some time and that it had gone to the big hangar in the sky.
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
From: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
I had heard there had been a fire incident with it at some time and that it had gone to the big hangar in the sky.
http://nl.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/photos/photos/9/9/3/1053399.jpg
Last edited by forget; 20th April 2007 at 09:47.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 41
From: UK
Are you thinking of XV257? ........on patrol off Land's End on the 3rd June 1984 when a fire in the bomb bay forced the crew to return to their base for an emergency landing. The fire may have been caused by a flare. The Nimrod was not repaired and was used as a spares source before being scrapped.
The source of the fire was the flare.
The aircraft was repaired.
Apart from that all the details are correct.
YS
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 221
Likes: 5
From: London
Surely the first Nimrod (of the 4 development batch aircraft) was XV226 not 227?
I think XV257 was flown back to Woodford in a stripped down configuration but was NOT returned to service. The accident actually ocurred during Taceval and, thankfully, only had a 42k fuel load for its SAR sortie (having been on SAR standby for the week previously with a full load). I doubt they would have made it with full fuselage tanks... I seem to recall they were airborne for 7 mins - 4 before the fire and 3 after.
I think XV257 was flown back to Woodford in a stripped down configuration but was NOT returned to service. The accident actually ocurred during Taceval and, thankfully, only had a 42k fuel load for its SAR sortie (having been on SAR standby for the week previously with a full load). I doubt they would have made it with full fuselage tanks... I seem to recall they were airborne for 7 mins - 4 before the fire and 3 after.
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
From: RAF Kinloss
XV227 suffered a problem in flight that grounded it for the best part of a year while it was repaired to a standard suitable for the flight to Woodford. I'm sure if you ook round the net you can find the details of it somewhere, as I'm not going in to it here...
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
From: Forres
XV 257 at St Mawgan
It was 42TB Crew 4 pilots were GT Smith and Gordon Laing.
The aircraft was repaired in the big hangar at St Mawgan for a one way flight to Woodford by a crew from there. Where it was used for spares and testing but never flew agian before being scrapped in the early 90s
The aircraft was repaired in the big hangar at St Mawgan for a one way flight to Woodford by a crew from there. Where it was used for spares and testing but never flew agian before being scrapped in the early 90s
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,231
Likes: 41
From: UK
It was 42TB Crew 4 pilots were GT Smith and Gordon Laing.
For some time there was a 1:50000 map in the OCU showing the track annotated with the time and events. I still have the transcipt of the incident. It makes interesting reading and shows how well it was handled by the whole crew. However if GT hadn't made the decision he did, to turn back for 13, but had gone for a reland on 31, I doubt that they would have made it. Nice one Gordon.
YS
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: GB
NIMROD MR2 XV257 3 JUN 84.
A brief issued post BOI report read as follows:
"About 2.5 mins after take off, the bomb bay fire bell sounded and flames were seen, through the periscope, at the rear of the bomb bay. Subsequently, the Centre Section Overheat warning light illuminated, the aileron bay Under Floor Warning sounded and smoke entered the fuselage; the fire extinguisher had no effect. The aircraft was returned to base but when the undercarriage was selected down, it stopped travelling due to a total Green System hydraulic failure. Selection of emergency undercarriage achieved 3 greens. There was then a fire warning from Zone 2 of the No 2 engine. On touchdown, one of the bomb bay doors dropped and struck the runway. The aircraft was slow to decelerate and suffered a burst tyre but was successfully turned off the runway, halted and evacuated. The fire was quickly extinguished but the aircraft suffered Cat 4 damage.
CAUSE. Not positively determined. During the tactical checks outbound, the fusing switch was set to FLARES/VT and the fire warning occurred 30 secs later, corresponding with flare ignition. The most likely cause of the fire was therefore electrical initiation of a flare which had fallen from its carrier and had rested against the bomb bay doors. The most probable cause of the release of the flare was considered to have been the incorrect cocking of the EMRU by a tradesman."
The aircraft was parked up in one of the Bellman Hangars at St Mawgan before being scab patched for the one flight to Woodford.
A brief issued post BOI report read as follows:
"About 2.5 mins after take off, the bomb bay fire bell sounded and flames were seen, through the periscope, at the rear of the bomb bay. Subsequently, the Centre Section Overheat warning light illuminated, the aileron bay Under Floor Warning sounded and smoke entered the fuselage; the fire extinguisher had no effect. The aircraft was returned to base but when the undercarriage was selected down, it stopped travelling due to a total Green System hydraulic failure. Selection of emergency undercarriage achieved 3 greens. There was then a fire warning from Zone 2 of the No 2 engine. On touchdown, one of the bomb bay doors dropped and struck the runway. The aircraft was slow to decelerate and suffered a burst tyre but was successfully turned off the runway, halted and evacuated. The fire was quickly extinguished but the aircraft suffered Cat 4 damage.
CAUSE. Not positively determined. During the tactical checks outbound, the fusing switch was set to FLARES/VT and the fire warning occurred 30 secs later, corresponding with flare ignition. The most likely cause of the fire was therefore electrical initiation of a flare which had fallen from its carrier and had rested against the bomb bay doors. The most probable cause of the release of the flare was considered to have been the incorrect cocking of the EMRU by a tradesman."
The aircraft was parked up in one of the Bellman Hangars at St Mawgan before being scab patched for the one flight to Woodford.
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
From: Bristol Temple Meads
Many thanks for all the info regarding XV257, but my interest is in XV227. Clearly from what has been posted, this aircraft underwent some major repair after an in-flight problem, and was then returned to BAe.