End of a distinguished career?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what does that mean in reality? What is the '10 going to fulfill in the AT role? Trails with servicemen to/from a Tornado det?
Is this purely a restriction to carrying civilians? Or any pax other than GEs/support crew.
Is this purely a restriction to carrying civilians? Or any pax other than GEs/support crew.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: norfolk
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After surviving for twice as long as it's design life, it is a tribute to the origonal design and strength, but eventually there has got to be some reservations about it's stuctural integrity. So instead of flying civilians, where if an 'incident' were to occur, the outcry and compensation claims would be a serious black mark, just use it for military purposes where the 'compo' claims would be limited by MoD 'rules'.
Just as a matter of interest, when was the last loss of a 'Transport Command' aircraft with family/civilian passengers on board ?
Just as a matter of interest, when was the last loss of a 'Transport Command' aircraft with family/civilian passengers on board ?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: lechlade UK
Age: 63
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VC10, no more pax!
The VC10 is an outstanding aircraft, serving the armed forces to the very best of her abillity but hey, if this aircraft is no longer safe for what ever reason, then stop flying it NOW! 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not at all. It is perfectly safe for flying servicemen but it doesn't adhere to civilian passenger regulations. It complies fully with Military passenger flying regulations.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Who knows where this week.......
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it not all a question of degree of risk? The aircraft is perfectly safe. In fact it's combination of structural integrity and its primary/secondary flying controls interoperation and power supplies are second to none. What it lacks is the safety features deemed necessary in a modern aircraft - floor lighting as an example. In the same way that modern cars all have airbags for instance, would you let your family go for a trip in a car that didn't have them? I suspect most of us would, acknowledging that the risk factor increase is limited. The military accepts the increased risk factor, in the same way that it accepts that troops in the back of a four tonner have no seat belts or airbags. Please don't think the old girl is unsafe, in many ways she is better off than many newer aircraft!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting more than a little fed up with sofa experts pontificating about whether the old girl is airworthy or not.
The issue is apparently regulatory not safety.
I have an old stude on the fleet who says it is all about strip lighting and gpws for carrying civilian pax rather than the airworthiness of the aircraft.
Mil pax can be dispensated against - civvies are a little more difficult in the post Nimrod climate.
If all you armchair experts can come up with is a nav error in the last 50 yrs of operating the VC10 then that surely says something for the safety record of the old girl.
The other question is why are you all so keen to see an aircraft and Sqn which picks up tasks from a lot of the newer fleets due serviceability talked down? From what I understand, the VC10, despite her age, picks up unfulfilled tasking from the quarter past 2's and the skips on a regular basis.
There are undoubtedly a great deal of our compatriots who are more than a little worried about job security, how about a little respect for them and a little recognition for a job well done in the current climate.
Some of you should be ashamed of yourselves.
Respond if you must, I wont be reading. Out.
The issue is apparently regulatory not safety.
I have an old stude on the fleet who says it is all about strip lighting and gpws for carrying civilian pax rather than the airworthiness of the aircraft.
Mil pax can be dispensated against - civvies are a little more difficult in the post Nimrod climate.
If all you armchair experts can come up with is a nav error in the last 50 yrs of operating the VC10 then that surely says something for the safety record of the old girl.
The other question is why are you all so keen to see an aircraft and Sqn which picks up tasks from a lot of the newer fleets due serviceability talked down? From what I understand, the VC10, despite her age, picks up unfulfilled tasking from the quarter past 2's and the skips on a regular basis.
There are undoubtedly a great deal of our compatriots who are more than a little worried about job security, how about a little respect for them and a little recognition for a job well done in the current climate.
Some of you should be ashamed of yourselves.
Respond if you must, I wont be reading. Out.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’d fly in her tomorrow if I had the chance. Without any hesitation.
Maybe, just maybe, somebody here, on this site, could organise one last flight for me. After 30 years in, worked on the aircraft, and flown lots, it would be a real treat......just asking??
Maybe, just maybe, somebody here, on this site, could organise one last flight for me. After 30 years in, worked on the aircraft, and flown lots, it would be a real treat......just asking??
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a little confused by the "If it's not safe enough for 'women and children' then it's not safe enough for our servicemen" argument.
Where would you draw the line? E.g. Indulgence pax are not allowed to travel when their are certain classes of DAC onboard, but duty pax are. Should the RAF find a way of remotely controlling ac carrying DAC and not putting any crew or duty pax on?
Where would you draw the line? E.g. Indulgence pax are not allowed to travel when their are certain classes of DAC onboard, but duty pax are. Should the RAF find a way of remotely controlling ac carrying DAC and not putting any crew or duty pax on?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what we are saying is that the fun bus is giving up the Akrotiri Schedule? Something it has had off and on for a while, sharing it with the Tri motor and various other airlines. No change then, 101 will go on as before flying around the world safely but at a huge cost per 'military' passenger and per ton of fuel dispensed. It should of been replaced years ago, not on safety grounds but on the fact that it is an inefficient and expensive asset. I for one would certainly fly in the old girl, i have no worries at all about its safety, just reservations about how much it costs, and its not cheap!
Join Date: May 2009
Location: England
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VC-10 passenger experience
Could someone who has flown on the VC-10s give a quick summary of the differences that a passenger would notice?
I've read about the strip lighting .. but what about the level of noise, and the room, etc. In what ways is it different from the Boeings and Airbus today?
thanks
I've read about the strip lighting .. but what about the level of noise, and the room, etc. In what ways is it different from the Boeings and Airbus today?
thanks
(Quote)Could someone who has flown on the VC-10s give a quick summary of the differences that a passenger would notice?(/Quote)
Well, as a former pax, the fact you sit facing the blunt end is certainly something the pax should notice (unless they imbibed in rather too much kockers in Cyprus).
Pete
Well, as a former pax, the fact you sit facing the blunt end is certainly something the pax should notice (unless they imbibed in rather too much kockers in Cyprus).
Pete
Last edited by Pete268; 26th Jan 2010 at 05:19.
Huckleberry T-tail
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London Village
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough of the sentimentality ladies. If it is not fit to fly under current civilian regulations then it is probably not fit to fly our troops around the world. What would Mrs Pongo say if a jet stoofed in? 'Oh well, it's alright, it was cleared to fly military pax!'
I doubt it. Get a grip and wake up to the fact that this edition of scrap heap challenge is actually quite serious.
I doubt it. Get a grip and wake up to the fact that this edition of scrap heap challenge is actually quite serious.
Redcarpet
If you ever go to China, make sure you never step into a spanking brand new Boeing or Airbus that is operated by a Chinese internal airline. They are not required to have everything that we are talking about. The lack of aisle lights etc, would obviously terrify you.
If you ever go to China, make sure you never step into a spanking brand new Boeing or Airbus that is operated by a Chinese internal airline. They are not required to have everything that we are talking about. The lack of aisle lights etc, would obviously terrify you.
