Why Are The Tucanos Knackered?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Puken
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why Are The Tucanos Knackered
I understand we shipped out a whole shed-load of Landrovers to Switzerland to keep them sweet after we dumped the PC9
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bury St Edmunds.
Age: 60
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Replacement.
Apart from the JP what would be the best aircraft to replace them with, 311, PC21 or maybe Harvard 11 or even the "super" Tucano?
I suppose it will come down to what deal the prime contractor can get from what manufacturer and/or what's politically expedient
.
Still be interested what the CFS would deem the most appropriate though.
I suppose it will come down to what deal the prime contractor can get from what manufacturer and/or what's politically expedient
. Still be interested what the CFS would deem the most appropriate though.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What makes you think the Tucano is knackered? Basically, it isn't. All the frames have been through the Fatigue Mod programme and are good for years to come. The only reason some are being binned at Shawbury is simply that the RAF doesn't need them anymore--the air force is much smaller than when the Tucano was ordered. In addition 4 are going/have gone to the States and I believe one is being put on the UK register.
How long the thing stays in service is totally dependant on MFTS, the contractor may opt to run the Tucano on for a few years whilst any new basic tainer is brought into service. Overall, the Tucano does a decent job, it's detractors are usually folk who don't know it too well. Yes, they are individual and some fly better than others but it does it's job.
How long the thing stays in service is totally dependant on MFTS, the contractor may opt to run the Tucano on for a few years whilst any new basic tainer is brought into service. Overall, the Tucano does a decent job, it's detractors are usually folk who don't know it too well. Yes, they are individual and some fly better than others but it does it's job.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your replies everyone - very interesting reading...
Firestreak - I thought the Tucano was knackered because I had heard in recent years similar stories to those posted above, have read articles in the aviation press about a replacement, and have seen them being placed into storage.
I suppose the thread title was a bit cheeky - but it seems to have stimulated interest and I'm glad that those like yourself have posted to tell your side of the story.
How successful has it been? Well, as someone who mills around with ex-Tucano drivers I don't hear ill spoken of it as a trainer, but the tales of ill-fitting canopies and non-interchangeable parts etc do persist.
Firestreak - I thought the Tucano was knackered because I had heard in recent years similar stories to those posted above, have read articles in the aviation press about a replacement, and have seen them being placed into storage.
I suppose the thread title was a bit cheeky - but it seems to have stimulated interest and I'm glad that those like yourself have posted to tell your side of the story.
How successful has it been? Well, as someone who mills around with ex-Tucano drivers I don't hear ill spoken of it as a trainer, but the tales of ill-fitting canopies and non-interchangeable parts etc do persist.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Farnborough gave a little hint at what the MoD will be replacing them with.
Either the Aeromacchi 311 or the Texan II. However more types might join the contest.
Knowing our Government we will opt for something different and cock it up again
Either the Aeromacchi 311 or the Texan II. However more types might join the contest.
Knowing our Government we will opt for something different and cock it up again
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought that the real assessment of any trainer after a period in service should start with asking whether the graduating pupils have reached the necessary high standard for the next stage of their development. If pupils have had to learn to deal with many various minor aircraft deficiencies (minor as in non flight safety related) then one can argue that this has contributed to their training experience.
If the pilots are to the required standard then by all means let us talk about costs, politics or whether people feel it looks sexy (good for morale).
I have never flown a Tucano - after my time.
So chaps (QFIs and bloggs) does it do the piloting job or not?
JF
If the pilots are to the required standard then by all means let us talk about costs, politics or whether people feel it looks sexy (good for morale).
I have never flown a Tucano - after my time.
So chaps (QFIs and bloggs) does it do the piloting job or not?
JF
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Puken
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So chaps (QFIs and bloggs) does it do the piloting job or not?
IMHO Tincan is a great platform to improve one's real piloting skills. It can be flown by anyone, but to do it on the numbers takes work/skill.
You're lacking speed and it's like the ride in a steamroller at low-level, but the basics get taught well.
However, many modern a/c are 'carefree' handling FBW with MFDs etc etc, so I guess the RAF needs to look at a/c that are internally configured that way, rather than the old analogue presentation.
But the bottom line is that it's doing its job of BASIC Flying Training well.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Hopefully Inverted
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno about any other bloggs, but I had a great time flying the tincan! I'm told it moved my abilities along for the better! Shame it was cut short, but never mind! My new aircraft has got a lot more room in it thankfully, and I'm told the next one will have an oven!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: the north
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other reason is when they came into service we were allowed to pull the wings off them as we assumed they would be as reliable as the Hawk. 5g max rate descending turns, can't even do that in my GR4!
2 years later and G was limited as they realised fatigue was going through the roof but alas too late. Good fun for inverted spinning and messing around in those days, 1997ish!
2 years later and G was limited as they realised fatigue was going through the roof but alas too late. Good fun for inverted spinning and messing around in those days, 1997ish!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: In a bush, a very bushy bush
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best aeroplane to replace the JP would have been a new JP. A JP6 with a modern engine, avionics etc would have done nicely.
After all, look at what's replaced each generation of Hawk - new Hawks!
After all, look at what's replaced each generation of Hawk - new Hawks!
and a certain Indian contract, we get an overpriced british alternative.The Tin can is a robust machine that takes plenty of abuse from the studes and staff alike and keeps on going. It was designed to train pilots who were to fly 70s aircraft and is now starting to fall short of the Linton mission statement "to train the pilots and WISOs of tomorrows airforce". The US, Canadians, Irish, Saudis etc have glass cockpit PC 9s of one guise or another and we are looking down the same route. Tucano has plenty of flying hours left in the airframe but falls short in other areas of training.
I certainly enjoyed flying the Tincan but bring on the 311 please....
PS we now pull 5.5g regularly-No g pants
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firecracker??
Mention made in this thread of the Firecracker. Hope my memory is behaving but I recall the CFS boys at Leeming in 1978/9 borrowing one for evalution of some kind. It was painted in camouflage I recall.
We were flying our Bulldogs with RNEFTS one day at Topcliffe and it pitches up mid afternoon. The CFI then appointed a chosen stude to fly in the back seat (suppose it was front seat??) for return to Leeming instead of the pussers bus !!! Thought is was a handsome aeroplane, but didn't realise what became of it until now. Was it piston rather than turbine?
Think the Firecracker was flown by Bob Cole???
Ahh Back in t'day.
FS
We were flying our Bulldogs with RNEFTS one day at Topcliffe and it pitches up mid afternoon. The CFI then appointed a chosen stude to fly in the back seat (suppose it was front seat??) for return to Leeming instead of the pussers bus !!! Thought is was a handsome aeroplane, but didn't realise what became of it until now. Was it piston rather than turbine?
Think the Firecracker was flown by Bob Cole???
Ahh Back in t'day.
FS
The JP was past it. Great if you still had Lightnings and Hunters as front line aircraft, but it was time to move on. I thought the Tuc was far superior in nearly all aspects. It was great when I instructed on it, and speaking to the current bods, things haven't changed much.
And BTW, the Irish glass cockpit PC9s aren't the trainers, they're the front line fighters!
And BTW, the Irish glass cockpit PC9s aren't the trainers, they're the front line fighters!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In what way is the Aermachi superior to the Hawk then ?
There's also the rather obvious benefit of commonality with the old fleet, and it's money for UK Ltd...
The 100 series has a dodgy looking nose because it has some rather useful kit, inc a laser rangefinder and FLIR - it was severely tested on G-Hawk and the shape doesn't cause any deficiencies - though if you want something a little more sexy try the Hawk 200.
I'm surprised to read about the 'hand crafted, every panel unique' nature of the Tucano - in the mid 1980's BAe were told EXTREMELY strictly that for the Harrier GR5 from then on all panels must be inter-changeable, no excuses.
There was a nasty accident early on when the Chief Test Pilot of the Tucano was killed - I thought there were rumours of unpleasant behaviour at handling extremes, and / or poor escape facilities.
As I say, rumours...forget the outcome of the BOI, though from experience that's not a thing to go by.
The Firecracker was deemed a lemon by a TP who knows what he's talking about !
There's also the rather obvious benefit of commonality with the old fleet, and it's money for UK Ltd...
The 100 series has a dodgy looking nose because it has some rather useful kit, inc a laser rangefinder and FLIR - it was severely tested on G-Hawk and the shape doesn't cause any deficiencies - though if you want something a little more sexy try the Hawk 200.
I'm surprised to read about the 'hand crafted, every panel unique' nature of the Tucano - in the mid 1980's BAe were told EXTREMELY strictly that for the Harrier GR5 from then on all panels must be inter-changeable, no excuses.
There was a nasty accident early on when the Chief Test Pilot of the Tucano was killed - I thought there were rumours of unpleasant behaviour at handling extremes, and / or poor escape facilities.
As I say, rumours...forget the outcome of the BOI, though from experience that's not a thing to go by.
The Firecracker was deemed a lemon by a TP who knows what he's talking about !
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bristol
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>The new hawk was forced on the military and was not the 1st choice, the >Aermacchi 346 outshone the 128 in all aspects, flew 1st and was >significantly cheaper but thanks to some lobbying by FAT MAN Prescott (MP >for Brough) (BAe builds the hawk 128 at Brough) and a certain Indian >contract, we get an overpriced british alternative.
I was under the impression that it was BAES claiming that they would have to close the Hawk design office that was applying the pressure, rather than Prescott being involved.
The competition was nothing short of open warfare between the MoD and treasury which at one point included the treasury claiming that the Hawk cost £1.8bn more than the 346, much greater than the total procurement cost for the Hawk option.
Not sure about being 'forced' on the military, but the DPA/DESO seemed to be happy enough with the Hawk to go to war with the treasury over it.
and a certain Indian >contract, we get an overpriced british alternative.I was under the impression that it was BAES claiming that they would have to close the Hawk design office that was applying the pressure, rather than Prescott being involved.
The competition was nothing short of open warfare between the MoD and treasury which at one point included the treasury claiming that the Hawk cost £1.8bn more than the 346, much greater than the total procurement cost for the Hawk option.
Not sure about being 'forced' on the military, but the DPA/DESO seemed to be happy enough with the Hawk to go to war with the treasury over it.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Not the front line
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In what way is the Aermachi superior to the Hawk then ?
Admittedly those numbers don't come from a well-respected verified source, but I remember the M346 being tested in Flight International and that sort of climb rate being mentioned. They went on at some length about it having the sort of performance that would bridge the gap nicely between a simple jet like their M311 and something like Typhoon or JSF. The 128 seems like it'll perform much like the T1. I'm sure the kit will be quite phenomenal and very useful for training future Typhoon and JSF pilots, but wouldn't it be nice to have the performance too?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There was a nasty accident early on when the Chief Test Pilot of the Tucano was killed - I thought there were rumours of unpleasant behaviour at handling extremes, and / or poor escape facilities."
I gather that Alan Deacon ejected into the Irish Sea when the tail detached during an underwing weapons clearing flight for a Kenyan aircraft (Shorts exported Tucanos to Kuwait and Kenya).
The ejection was successful but he drowned before getting into his dinghy.
I gather that Alan Deacon ejected into the Irish Sea when the tail detached during an underwing weapons clearing flight for a Kenyan aircraft (Shorts exported Tucanos to Kuwait and Kenya).
The ejection was successful but he drowned before getting into his dinghy.