Flying the Canberra
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: In the Middle
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Memories
Icing approach fixed RPM 2800 + or - 50. Descend only when cleared to land. When runway insight and clear aim 1/3 up and then close both throttles. Use flap to bring the touch down closer to the threshold. The PR7 had minimal anti-icing but before that it was chattering inlet guide vanes as around the 2800 RPM they did not know whether to be open or closed!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I seem to remember the 'Icing Let Down' was 6000 RPM, all the way down until sure of landing. 6000 was to be set before entering cloud during the let down. Remembering to nudge the RPM up as it decayed in the descent. Then using the airbrakes/bombdoors to (try!) to control the speed after levelling off at 1500ft, then the 'gear' to initiate final approach descent. No flaps until 'sure' of landing.
Gnat = STUPRECC. I do not think ANYBODY that flew the Gnat will ever forget that!
Gnat = STUPRECC. I do not think ANYBODY that flew the Gnat will ever forget that!
FL575 - cannot recall - sounds more like idling - maybe one can find Canberre B2/T4/T17 pilots notes on-line! Wife says how come I can remember all this drivel, but come back without items on the shopping list!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: West of Akrotiri & the B Sours
Age: 73
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Icing let down - 6000rpm as I recall on the ones I flew in. Plenty of good stories of the bomb bay full of Cyprus goodies (and luggage) which were lost when trying desparately to slow down. If you've done one you will remember clearly - it was like the let down in Aliens.
Anyone remember night practice asymmetrics with the QFI on board to get the monthly stats up? On the fourth pilot of the evening, hot crew switches were the norm, pilot heard to say, "600 feet, ball in the middle, on the glidepath, speed 145 - MY DECISION IS TO LAND". At 300 feet, a somehwat less authorative, "We're not going to make it". Strangled scream from QFI as my hand fondled the handle waiting for the roll, "Don't eject - bringing the other one up" Fortunately it did not not do what most Avons did i.e. cough and splutter. The debrief was interesting!
Anyone remember night practice asymmetrics with the QFI on board to get the monthly stats up? On the fourth pilot of the evening, hot crew switches were the norm, pilot heard to say, "600 feet, ball in the middle, on the glidepath, speed 145 - MY DECISION IS TO LAND". At 300 feet, a somehwat less authorative, "We're not going to make it". Strangled scream from QFI as my hand fondled the handle waiting for the roll, "Don't eject - bringing the other one up" Fortunately it did not not do what most Avons did i.e. cough and splutter. The debrief was interesting!
Last edited by BSweeper; 25th Mar 2010 at 22:43.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Top Canberra tip - always remember to open the throttles a bit downwind after a run-and-break!
Oh - and don't carry swords in the bomb-bay!
Jacko,
There was a change from Hawk to METS ab-initios in about 1980.
Oh - and don't carry swords in the bomb-bay!
Jacko,
There was a change from Hawk to METS ab-initios in about 1980.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackonicko
You are right about 360 Sqn, since lots of the pilots were RN of course - including my brother-in -law who came from Sea King "pingers" to the Canberra. The Navy regarded a Canberra tour as a lead in for potential SHAR pilots and we had a lot of people from the Wessex and Sea King, not to mention the Gannet!
Of course the great majority of RAF pilots joining were did come from various stages of fast jet training, and a great many went back down that route very successfully after some time on a Canberra Squadron.
In my case I had never expected to end up on the Canberra (though I am very glad I did) having wanted to be a truckie. I volunteered for the UAS after getting my QFI "blessing", and then spent another 14 years on the Nimrod.
Hard to forget some of the characters around in those days, including one or two truly legendary and eccentric RN Flight Commanders with experience of everything from the Sea Fury to the Harrier.
You are right about 360 Sqn, since lots of the pilots were RN of course - including my brother-in -law who came from Sea King "pingers" to the Canberra. The Navy regarded a Canberra tour as a lead in for potential SHAR pilots and we had a lot of people from the Wessex and Sea King, not to mention the Gannet!
Of course the great majority of RAF pilots joining were did come from various stages of fast jet training, and a great many went back down that route very successfully after some time on a Canberra Squadron.
In my case I had never expected to end up on the Canberra (though I am very glad I did) having wanted to be a truckie. I volunteered for the UAS after getting my QFI "blessing", and then spent another 14 years on the Nimrod.
Hard to forget some of the characters around in those days, including one or two truly legendary and eccentric RN Flight Commanders with experience of everything from the Sea Fury to the Harrier.
west raynham 1973
I was a sprog cadet at West Raynham c 1973 - fond memories of 100 Sqn (& 85 Sqn too ?) Canberras- TT 18's mostly ?
Sad time too as one had been lost the week before
Cnaberra.
What a wonderfully nostalgic thread about a wonderful aeroplane. But wasn't the safety speed in a B2, PR3, T4 140 knots ? I remember that speed being drilled into my head at Bassingbourn and having done many crit. speed checks after engineering I seem to remember that those crit. speeds weren't far short of 140.
I will always remember the Canberra as a wonderfully pleasant and easy machine to fly on two engines, but a very demanding machine on one, great training, fly it by the book and it works, stray and you're on your own !
Looking back on my career give me a Canberra for fun and sheer flying pleasure anyday, but if I had to do some asymmetric flying give me a 767 or a VC10. !
I still remember with a smile, the guy who opened his bomb doors to slow down on an icing approach, quite forgetting the full pannier, a depositing his goodies across north East Lincolnshire !
I will always remember the Canberra as a wonderfully pleasant and easy machine to fly on two engines, but a very demanding machine on one, great training, fly it by the book and it works, stray and you're on your own !
Looking back on my career give me a Canberra for fun and sheer flying pleasure anyday, but if I had to do some asymmetric flying give me a 767 or a VC10. !
I still remember with a smile, the guy who opened his bomb doors to slow down on an icing approach, quite forgetting the full pannier, a depositing his goodies across north East Lincolnshire !
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some idea of the possible/probable asymmetric problems of the PR9 may be gained from the following tale. It should be remembered that there was not, of course, a two stick PR9. So the first time that a pilot flew it solo, was the first time that he flew it.
There were 2 crews on my conversion course, my crew and that of ‘M M’. After a few ‘solo’ sorties, we were at the phase of experiencing the different ‘wind up’ rates of the various RR209s.
Most people will know that, the time from ‘flight idle’ to full power could vary by quite a few seconds, with different engines. Also, as has been stated, most of the sharp end of the power came in the last 10% of the RPM range, i.e. from 8000lb thrust at 90%, to the max 11250lb at 100%.
To demonstrate this, and to give some practice at ‘rudder juggling’, the following profile was flown.
The aircraft was to be flown to FL200 (about 20,000ft to our non flying friends) and towards the top of the climb, the speed allowed to decay from climbing speed of 330kts/0.72M, to about 130kts (ish). Then a good old look around etc, and select 2 extra fuel pumps. The throttles were then to be fully closed, and the speed allowed to decay to 90kts, i.e. getting towards stalling speed. And, of course, way below the safety speed of 170kts.
At this point, both throttles were to be slammed fully open. This is where the fun started.
My Nav and I did this first, in the morning slot. And believe me it was an exciting ride. But I was lucky, and both of my engines wound up reasonably well together, and with judicious and fast juggling of the rudder pedals, the aircraft was kept basically straight and level.
Then, in the afternoon slot, it was the turn of ‘M M’ and his Nav. However they did not have the same aircraft that we had used in the morning.
After they had landed from the sortie, I went to have a chat with M M. As I approached him, I though that his eyes seemed a bit wild, and he had aged somewhat.
He told me that he had flown the aircraft as briefed, and slowed the aircraft down to 90kts etc. He then ‘whanged’ the throttles open. The stbd engine did its best, but just could not keep up with the port one. And just as the port reached 100%, the stbd was struggling past 70%. It was at this point that the PR9 flicked. He recovered the aircraft at about FL100.
There were 2 crews on my conversion course, my crew and that of ‘M M’. After a few ‘solo’ sorties, we were at the phase of experiencing the different ‘wind up’ rates of the various RR209s.
Most people will know that, the time from ‘flight idle’ to full power could vary by quite a few seconds, with different engines. Also, as has been stated, most of the sharp end of the power came in the last 10% of the RPM range, i.e. from 8000lb thrust at 90%, to the max 11250lb at 100%.
To demonstrate this, and to give some practice at ‘rudder juggling’, the following profile was flown.
The aircraft was to be flown to FL200 (about 20,000ft to our non flying friends) and towards the top of the climb, the speed allowed to decay from climbing speed of 330kts/0.72M, to about 130kts (ish). Then a good old look around etc, and select 2 extra fuel pumps. The throttles were then to be fully closed, and the speed allowed to decay to 90kts, i.e. getting towards stalling speed. And, of course, way below the safety speed of 170kts.
At this point, both throttles were to be slammed fully open. This is where the fun started.
My Nav and I did this first, in the morning slot. And believe me it was an exciting ride. But I was lucky, and both of my engines wound up reasonably well together, and with judicious and fast juggling of the rudder pedals, the aircraft was kept basically straight and level.
Then, in the afternoon slot, it was the turn of ‘M M’ and his Nav. However they did not have the same aircraft that we had used in the morning.
After they had landed from the sortie, I went to have a chat with M M. As I approached him, I though that his eyes seemed a bit wild, and he had aged somewhat.
He told me that he had flown the aircraft as briefed, and slowed the aircraft down to 90kts etc. He then ‘whanged’ the throttles open. The stbd engine did its best, but just could not keep up with the port one. And just as the port reached 100%, the stbd was struggling past 70%. It was at this point that the PR9 flicked. He recovered the aircraft at about FL100.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: In the Middle
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand buit
Canberras were “hand built” –
On an air test a T17 without tip tanks was flown to the approach stall ie power on uc down, as it stalled it rapidly rotated, not a flick but fast enough to end up nose down inverted. No engine surge, wings were level ball in the middle on entry. Next air test was with tip tanks on, predictions were for a more interesting reaction at the stall – crew had very tight harnesses but it was totally benign!
After a major a T17 just would not trim out laterally. Riggers did everything possible including changing the ailerons. Test after test and still it would not trim out. Then a chief took a piece of string from the nose to the port wing tip and when he tried to take it from the nose to the starboard tip it wouldn’t reach. After much research in ancient paper work it was discovered that as a B2 it had been fitted with 2 wings both within spec but outside the difference spec and the tail plane had been bent to compensate – on the major a new tail plane hade been fitted!
On an air test a T17 without tip tanks was flown to the approach stall ie power on uc down, as it stalled it rapidly rotated, not a flick but fast enough to end up nose down inverted. No engine surge, wings were level ball in the middle on entry. Next air test was with tip tanks on, predictions were for a more interesting reaction at the stall – crew had very tight harnesses but it was totally benign!
After a major a T17 just would not trim out laterally. Riggers did everything possible including changing the ailerons. Test after test and still it would not trim out. Then a chief took a piece of string from the nose to the port wing tip and when he tried to take it from the nose to the starboard tip it wouldn’t reach. After much research in ancient paper work it was discovered that as a B2 it had been fitted with 2 wings both within spec but outside the difference spec and the tail plane had been bent to compensate – on the major a new tail plane hade been fitted!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Axminster Devon
Age: 83
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overshooting the normal approach
Originally Posted by Trim Stab
Interesting that you flew 2 engined approach so much slower than the asymmetric approach. If on a 2 engined approach you had to do a "real" go around, and then had a flame-out as you applied full power, would the aircraft have remained controllable?
Originally Posted by WarmandDry
Certainly know of one case of a surge on short finals where they ended up touching down parallel to the rw but landed across the unoccupied QRA pans and all got out but with minor injuries (even the pax in the jump seat).
Actually, flame-out it was not. We never heard of flame-outs at low level, although some crews regularly lost power in this way at height, in or around cu-nims.
The design of our Avon engines incorporated two deliberate fudges to account for a mismatch between the compressor at the front and the turbine at the back. The airflow was of course optimised for high RPM. The first fudge concerned the way the first stage of the compressor received the incoming air. The air might usually have been directed into the compressor by “stators”. The Avon’s equivalents were called “swirl vanes” and were not fixed but had two positions. As I remember, they changed position at 6100 RPM. If they did not the engine would surge on acceleration – but I never heard of this mechanism actually failing. Others have mentioned the icing drill – 6000 RPM was significant because the swirl vanes would at least be in their approach configuration whatever ice they collected.
The other fudge arose because, the compressor and the turbine being ganged together, at low RPM the compressor pulled in more air than the combustion stage could burn. Bleed valves would open to exhaust this excess air. If when the engine was being run up they remained open, then the engine would settle at the RPM at which they should have closed and would no doubt generate not enough thrust. As I remember, the critical range was 2800 to 3200 RPM. One would always watch the gauges to make sure this phase was safely passed, and then be more casually interested that the needles twitched appropriately going through 6100 RPM.
The Kuantan case was of a bleed valve failure. The aircraft was comfortably airborne and might have accelerated away if it was not for the flaps.
As has been mentioned, the Canberra’s flaps were either up or down. On selection, either up or down, they moved very deliberately. When down they were very effective.
So the flaps are down. One of the hydraulic pumps is underperforming along with its associated engine. If the pilot tries to raise them, both the undercarriage and the flaps would come up more slowly than normal. Apart from that, the pilot has at least one throttle bent forwards and an ache is developing in one leg. He may or may not be trying to bring the dud engine down and up again. But his eyes will be fixed on the air speed indicator and he will be disappointed to realise, knot by decreasing knot, that the flaps remain more effective than the one good engine. Happily he makes the one really critical decision and closes the good throttle – and the god of rubber plantations is kind to him.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: California
Age: 44
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear all,
I am working on a book based on the 'Canberra experience' as told in the words of those that flew and serviced the type in the various air forces around the world (quite a few as you may well know). To cut a long story short, if would be interested in contributing, please check out the thread below, where full details of the project and basics about contribution are given:
http://www.pprune.org/aviation-histo...r-request.html
Best regards to all,
Steve
I am working on a book based on the 'Canberra experience' as told in the words of those that flew and serviced the type in the various air forces around the world (quite a few as you may well know). To cut a long story short, if would be interested in contributing, please check out the thread below, where full details of the project and basics about contribution are given:
http://www.pprune.org/aviation-histo...r-request.html
Best regards to all,
Steve
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK, North Riding
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I joined the Canberra force from training in 1954, flew it for 4 1/2 years on T4, B2 and B6 and enjoyed every bit of it. It was a delight to fly and at the beginning it out-performed most of the types Fighter Command could launch against us on exercises. Its achilles heel though was the awful heating/cooling system. After an hour or so at or above 40,000 ft everything in the cockpit was covered in rime and it stayed that way until it began to melt during the let-down, drenching the nav plotter's charts unless he remembered to put them away. For sorties of 3 hours or more we were each given a couple of chocolate biscuits and a small can of orange juice and if one delayed opening the orange juice for three hours or so it was frozen solid. Operating the Canberra in a tropical climate was probably worse. One was soaked through with sweat by the time the checks had been done and then frozen at operating height. Nevertheless, we got used to it but in this respect it was certainly a young man's aeroplane.
I'm not sure that asymmetric in the Canberra was entirely the bogey which seems to be its legacy and I suspect that conscious lack of practice played its part. Quite early on I decided to make an asymmetric landing as often as I could and it gave me enough confidence to be much less windy about the lurid tales of others who, I suspect, steered well clear of asymmetric except when a check ride forced it upon them !
I'm not sure that asymmetric in the Canberra was entirely the bogey which seems to be its legacy and I suspect that conscious lack of practice played its part. Quite early on I decided to make an asymmetric landing as often as I could and it gave me enough confidence to be much less windy about the lurid tales of others who, I suspect, steered well clear of asymmetric except when a check ride forced it upon them !
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: California
Age: 44
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers for that, Pindi, that describes the bake or freeze aspect of the Canberra very well. On some Cans I've seen little fans in the cabin for the pilot and nav, mounted on the coaming in some cases - did you have these or was this most likely a later mod?
Asymmetric handling is such an interesting subject (for the armchair enthusiast like myself, never having had to do it!). I know for a fact that the Rhodesians flew some long range ops on one engine for the outbound leg so as you say, it seems it was possible beyond landing with some practice and careful handling. I do understand this was considered rather dicey by the RhAF pilots themselves though and they were loath to have a flame out in this situation.
I will send you a PM, as I would love to hear more about your time, especially as you came on around the heyday of the aircraft.
Best regards,
Steve
Asymmetric handling is such an interesting subject (for the armchair enthusiast like myself, never having had to do it!). I know for a fact that the Rhodesians flew some long range ops on one engine for the outbound leg so as you say, it seems it was possible beyond landing with some practice and careful handling. I do understand this was considered rather dicey by the RhAF pilots themselves though and they were loath to have a flame out in this situation.
I will send you a PM, as I would love to hear more about your time, especially as you came on around the heyday of the aircraft.
Best regards,
Steve
Last edited by nazca_steve; 3rd Feb 2012 at 18:50.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canberra Sorties in the Falklands War
Here's an interesting page on Canberra sorties during the Falklands War.
They didn't stand much chance against Sea Harriers.
They didn't stand much chance against Sea Harriers.
Steve: On some Cans I've seen little fans in the cabin for the pilot and nav, mounted on the coaming in some cases
Just worth noting here, the B.20 started production in Australia based on the B.2. The first 27 were basically B.2s, with what we called Avon Mk.1s, limited integral wing fuel tanks (total was 14.6k LB), and bugger-all avionics. The remaining 21 B.20s were based on the B.6, with Avon 109s, increased integral fuel (all up 17.6, and 21.6 with tips) and Green Satin and GPI mk.4 (I think). Before deployment to Vietnam in a USAF wing, we had added TACAN, UHF and armour plate for pilot and nav.
I always thought it strange the upgunning from B.2 to B.6 didn't warrant a new designator - it would have been B.22 at that stage.
The T.21s were a mixed bag, and didn't have the T.4 solid nose. Two were modded from the ex-RAF B.2 prodn pattern aircraft, and five were modded from the first B.20 production - so all had the clear bombaimer nose.
Note, RAAF always operated the bomber with 2 crew - pilot and nav, not the 2 navs the RAF strike/attack aircraft had.
Lot of fun the Canberra - 2500 hours in five and a half years, those were the days!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: California
Age: 44
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now you're talking my language 
. As an Anglo-Argentine myself, the usage of the Canberra in the Argentine Air Force is an area of, shall we say, mild interest to me (putting it mildly indeed!). A few years back I got in touch with a fellow Canberra nut down there by the name of Marcelo Siri, whose late father had been a nav from the late 70s to his death from cancer in 1983. He flew a couple of ops during the Falklands whilst suffering from his terminal illness, despite the orders of the station surgeons and the best intention of his comrades. He literally had to be carried to and from the aircraft, and whilst lying prone in the nose cone, the pilot was audibly aware of his great pain.
Regardless of any politics surrounding the Falklands War (both then and now), the bravery and absolute professionalism of the air and ground crew of the Grupo 2 de Bombardeo is, for me, without question. Consequently, we started an Association down there, reuniting former G2B personnel and getting the Canberra the recognition it had been long overdue in a conflict where Mirages and Daggers dominated the public eye on both sides. As a result, we've taken big strides in restoration work for B-101 and B-102, two Falklands survivors. B-109, another B.62, is preserved in the Museo Aeronautical in Buenos Aires, in superb condition, and I had the pleasure of sitting in both it and B-101 (incidentally, the one flown by Roland Beamont on trials for the 20th aniv. of the Canberra in 1969). There is also now talk of attempting to do something for the rather folorn B-112, the only remaining T.64 trainer.
Regarding the irony of Trelew being a Welsh colony, yes, it is without doubt with noting. Their combat ops are a whole separate discussion which I am more than happy to get into any time.
For more reading on the subject (admittedly, all in spanish), check out the web site Marcelo and I built:
Canberras Argentinos: BAC Canberra B.Mk.62 y T.Mk.64 de la Fuerza Aerea Argentina
and in particular, my visit in English: (Canberras Argentinos)
tons of photos there which tell a good story even if you can't read spanish. I am happy to translate anything, and some of the war stories on there will be translated and form part of the Argentine experience in my book. At the very least, former pilots and navs on here may be interested to check out the cabin photos to compare notes on the B.62 layout, and of course to see an SFOM gun sight fitted for those who never had interdictor experience.
. As an Anglo-Argentine myself, the usage of the Canberra in the Argentine Air Force is an area of, shall we say, mild interest to me (putting it mildly indeed!). A few years back I got in touch with a fellow Canberra nut down there by the name of Marcelo Siri, whose late father had been a nav from the late 70s to his death from cancer in 1983. He flew a couple of ops during the Falklands whilst suffering from his terminal illness, despite the orders of the station surgeons and the best intention of his comrades. He literally had to be carried to and from the aircraft, and whilst lying prone in the nose cone, the pilot was audibly aware of his great pain. Regardless of any politics surrounding the Falklands War (both then and now), the bravery and absolute professionalism of the air and ground crew of the Grupo 2 de Bombardeo is, for me, without question. Consequently, we started an Association down there, reuniting former G2B personnel and getting the Canberra the recognition it had been long overdue in a conflict where Mirages and Daggers dominated the public eye on both sides. As a result, we've taken big strides in restoration work for B-101 and B-102, two Falklands survivors. B-109, another B.62, is preserved in the Museo Aeronautical in Buenos Aires, in superb condition, and I had the pleasure of sitting in both it and B-101 (incidentally, the one flown by Roland Beamont on trials for the 20th aniv. of the Canberra in 1969). There is also now talk of attempting to do something for the rather folorn B-112, the only remaining T.64 trainer.
Regarding the irony of Trelew being a Welsh colony, yes, it is without doubt with noting. Their combat ops are a whole separate discussion which I am more than happy to get into any time.
For more reading on the subject (admittedly, all in spanish), check out the web site Marcelo and I built:
Canberras Argentinos: BAC Canberra B.Mk.62 y T.Mk.64 de la Fuerza Aerea Argentina
and in particular, my visit in English: (Canberras Argentinos)
tons of photos there which tell a good story even if you can't read spanish. I am happy to translate anything, and some of the war stories on there will be translated and form part of the Argentine experience in my book. At the very least, former pilots and navs on here may be interested to check out the cabin photos to compare notes on the B.62 layout, and of course to see an SFOM gun sight fitted for those who never had interdictor experience.