Typhoon ground refeulling trial photos 1998
Thread Starter
Typhoon ground refeulling trial photos 1998
The British prototype lined up behind a Tristar KC1 to check refuelling boom compatability. It was covered in test equipment, including the camera seen in the canopy.
And, whilst we are talking of Timmys, if I remember correctly, they were ferrying a spare engine out for another one which was broken downroute- it was too big to fit through the cargo door, so they bolted it onto the wing...
I do love my new scanner!
SB
And, whilst we are talking of Timmys, if I remember correctly, they were ferrying a spare engine out for another one which was broken downroute- it was too big to fit through the cargo door, so they bolted it onto the wing...
I do love my new scanner!
SB
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Age: 50
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice pics. It's sometimes hard to remember how long the Typhoon has been around!Of course, the spare engine capability has been done before:
Can't wait to see a pod for the A400 engine!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Cotswolds
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tristar spare engine has LP fan blades removed, and core blanked to prevent windmilling. It is mounted inboard of the number 3 engine if my memory serves me correctly. Not much need for the kit these days, C-17 has a sufficiently large cargo door
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Certainly is DA2. It has the Spin Recovery System fitted and still has the RB199 engines. I would have said it was 1997 but I could be wrong. Nice photos btw.
Last edited by peekay; 16th Jan 2009 at 16:42.
Yes, the Typhoon was found guilty of taking on fuel like a complete big-girl's-blouse! Flow rate is pathetic. AAR pipework added as an afterthought, and consequently worse than that in a cheap central heating system.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pegasus bomber
Alright Tim,
Keep your hair on, I was right it was some sort of V-bomber ( tis' a long time since I had the photo's ).
When the Harrier GR5 appeared, it had the feature of 'hot refuelling', ie filling up on the ground without shutting down the engine.
A test pilot got a bit carried away one day when in a Sea Harrier, and requested hot refuelling - snag being on the Harrier 1 series the refuelling point is aft of the forward nozzle !
To his credit ( ? ) the groundcrew chap did try, before backing off hastily.
Keep your hair on, I was right it was some sort of V-bomber ( tis' a long time since I had the photo's ).
When the Harrier GR5 appeared, it had the feature of 'hot refuelling', ie filling up on the ground without shutting down the engine.
A test pilot got a bit carried away one day when in a Sea Harrier, and requested hot refuelling - snag being on the Harrier 1 series the refuelling point is aft of the forward nozzle !
To his credit ( ? ) the groundcrew chap did try, before backing off hastily.
When the Harrier GR5 appeared, it had the feature of 'hot refuelling', ie filling up on the ground without shutting down the engine.
A test pilot got a bit carried away one day when in a Sea Harrier, and requested hot refuelling - snag being on the Harrier 1 series the refuelling point is aft of the forward nozzle !
A test pilot got a bit carried away one day when in a Sea Harrier, and requested hot refuelling - snag being on the Harrier 1 series the refuelling point is aft of the forward nozzle !
Sorry about the thread drift.
Typhoon ground refeulling trial photos 1998
It's sometimes hard to remember how long the Typhoon has been around!
(Maybe this belongs in AH&N)
A few photos of the beast in action
Last edited by Fishtailed; 17th Jan 2009 at 06:51.
Typhoon tanker trials.
Typhoon was found guilty of taking on fuel like a complete big-girl's-blouse! Flow rate is pathetic. AAR pipework added as an afterthought, and consequently worse than that in a cheap central heating system.
The retractable probe is a wonderful piece of engineering and works as designed on the production aircraft.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
**THREAD CREEP ALERT**
22 years since EAP? Time flies and all that.
However: when I asked a BAe bloke who'd worked on said EAP, he said that it was millions of miles away from being a production combat a/c, and that the fuselage structure was actually based on a Tonka.
Anyone out there able to shed more light?
Many thanks,
S41
22 years since EAP? Time flies and all that.
However: when I asked a BAe bloke who'd worked on said EAP, he said that it was millions of miles away from being a production combat a/c, and that the fuselage structure was actually based on a Tonka.
Anyone out there able to shed more light?
Many thanks,
S41
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Wichita, USA
Age: 61
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The retractable probe is a wonderful piece of engineering and works as designed on the production aircraft.
I do seem to remember a certain guest TP getting over zealous during AAR trials with a VC 10 - the frangible link definitely works as advertised!
it was millions of miles away from being a production combat a/c,
the fuselage structure was actually based on a Tonka.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fishtailed
Many thanks - I was just curious, because a member of the local pub experten was recently telling anyone who'd listen that we could've had EAP in Sqn service by 1990, and that the decision to "bin it" and go for Typhoon was a total waste (and worse, pro-European!).
I'd not dispute that the management of the Typhoon programme could er, be "improved", but it did sound like little-Englandism to try and cast EAP as another TSR-2 might-have-been.
Out of interest, what happened to the EAP airframes?
S41
Many thanks - I was just curious, because a member of the local pub experten was recently telling anyone who'd listen that we could've had EAP in Sqn service by 1990, and that the decision to "bin it" and go for Typhoon was a total waste (and worse, pro-European!
).I'd not dispute that the management of the Typhoon programme could er, be "improved", but it did sound like little-Englandism to try and cast EAP as another TSR-2 might-have-been.
Out of interest, what happened to the EAP airframes?
S41