AAR Then & Now ...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 66
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
AAR Then & Now ...
Our good friend Dragartist recently sent me a copy of the Air Reserve Gazette dated June 1947. Inside was a double page spread that I thought other Members (especially BEagle) might appreciate 
Image Credit : Air Reserve Gazette : Front Cover June 1947
Just for background ... The ARG was the forerunner to Air Pictorial which then became Aviation News.
Image Credit : Air Reserve Gazette June 1947.
I particularly liked the pic of the 'First Woman Refuelling Operator' ... a Miss W. B. Greest. Clearly her Refuelling Desk was very spartan back then compared with the Voyager of today (see below).
Image Credit : AirTanker 2014
A pictorial curiosity really showing how far the art of AAR has progressed over the last 67 years (yes, I do appreciate there were earlier experiments).
Best regards ...
Coff.
Image Credit : Air Reserve Gazette : Front Cover June 1947
Just for background ... The ARG was the forerunner to Air Pictorial which then became Aviation News.
Image Credit : Air Reserve Gazette June 1947.
I particularly liked the pic of the 'First Woman Refuelling Operator' ... a Miss W. B. Greest. Clearly her Refuelling Desk was very spartan back then compared with the Voyager of today (see below).
Image Credit : AirTanker 2014
A pictorial curiosity really showing how far the art of AAR has progressed over the last 67 years (yes, I do appreciate there were earlier experiments).
Best regards ...
Coff.
Thanks for posting, Coff - very interesting.
I've just given a talk at St Mawgan on the history of AAR in the UK - wish I'd had those pictures then. During the talk I explained that the first successful "probe and drogue" contact was in 1949 when a Meteor successfully made contact with a Lincoln.
Here's a great clip of the system that Sir Alan Cobham's Flight Refuelling company devised for the Empire Flying Boat (one of the earlier experiments you referred to). I love the blokes in their smart flying suits and caps winding the hose in like crazy!
I like the Voyager's refuelling station - never mind the Lancaster, it's a lot more impressive than the one in the Victor. I've still got a bad back from bending over that damn rear-view periscope!
I've just given a talk at St Mawgan on the history of AAR in the UK - wish I'd had those pictures then. During the talk I explained that the first successful "probe and drogue" contact was in 1949 when a Meteor successfully made contact with a Lincoln.
Here's a great clip of the system that Sir Alan Cobham's Flight Refuelling company devised for the Empire Flying Boat (one of the earlier experiments you referred to). I love the blokes in their smart flying suits and caps winding the hose in like crazy!
I like the Voyager's refuelling station - never mind the Lancaster, it's a lot more impressive than the one in the Victor. I've still got a bad back from bending over that damn rear-view periscope!
There's progress, a complete AAR operator station, bigger than the complete FE station of previous RAF tankers, remote from the flightdeck, but, in reality, an extra crewmember. 
Anyone like to say who precisely had it in for Flight Engineers?
OAP
Anyone like to say who precisely had it in for Flight Engineers?
OAP
That Voyager MSO's station is an utter triumph of style over substance.
Absurdly over-engineered and yet it still lacks significant core mission functionality requirements ....
Spot any moving map or TACAN display? Or even a fuel graph?
Absurdly over-engineered and yet it still lacks significant core mission functionality requirements ....
Spot any moving map or TACAN display? Or even a fuel graph?
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Two points from the film clip.
1. If the tanker moves too far ahead of the receiver, the hose will foul the tailplane.
2. Those guys were transferring PETROL
1. If the tanker moves too far ahead of the receiver, the hose will foul the tailplane.
2. Those guys were transferring PETROL
remote from the flightdeck
As for
Anyone like to say who precisely had it in for Flight Engineers?
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTO,
you beat me to it. I noted the double cup holder.
When I was involved in rack layouts for the R the position of the cup holder took preference over the roller ball. We had some rather nice double cup holders. Not suitable for the big insulated cups. Only the small white paper ones.
No ashtray?
On a serious note, Thanks for sharing this stuff Coff. I knew other Pruners would be interested. I quite liked the article on the flying saucers. 1947 - ten years before we were born.
Drag
you beat me to it. I noted the double cup holder.
When I was involved in rack layouts for the R the position of the cup holder took preference over the roller ball. We had some rather nice double cup holders. Not suitable for the big insulated cups. Only the small white paper ones.
No ashtray?
On a serious note, Thanks for sharing this stuff Coff. I knew other Pruners would be interested. I quite liked the article on the flying saucers. 1947 - ten years before we were born.
Drag
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,032
Received 2,902 Likes
on
1,243 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 big tv screens, how does the MEL read? 4 fitted, X required....
How did the VC10 FE ever cope:
Photo Credit: Chris Willetts, Aero resource.
Or the chaps on the Victor, with a periscope:
Photo Credit: Dave Robinson, Victor Reunion
The MSO has great SA on where the receivers are, once they're in close formation, no SA on where they are themselves or where the receivers are before they join the formation unless the pilots tell them. That's not entirely true though, they could have great SA beyond the vision system once all available avionics/mission systems are cleared for use.
How did the VC10 FE ever cope:
Photo Credit: Chris Willetts, Aero resource.
Or the chaps on the Victor, with a periscope:
Photo Credit: Dave Robinson, Victor Reunion
The MSO has great SA on where the receivers are, once they're in close formation, no SA on where they are themselves or where the receivers are before they join the formation unless the pilots tell them. That's not entirely true though, they could have great SA beyond the vision system once all available avionics/mission systems are cleared for use.
Thanks for posting the pic D-IFF-IDENT - it brings back memories. That's the periscope I was talking about above which my lower back still reminds me about! The photo was taken when the crew were on a Western ranger to Offutt, and the USAF colonel who wrote the article from which it's taken says some nice things about the Victor. Here's the full article.
V-Force Reunion - Victor Tankers In The RAF
I see Geoff "the ref" Armitage is wearing his 214 and One Ton Budgie badges - still got mine in a drawer somewhere. The whole set up looks like something out of the ark compared with the Voyager, but it worked well.
V-Force Reunion - Victor Tankers In The RAF
I see Geoff "the ref" Armitage is wearing his 214 and One Ton Budgie badges - still got mine in a drawer somewhere. The whole set up looks like something out of the ark compared with the Voyager, but it worked well.
Before that all the NavRad/refuelling operator had was dial that showed how far the hose was run out. He only knew the receiver had made contact when the hose started moving. He managed to refuel Vulcans to Australia, Javelins to Singapore via Pakistan or India and Lightnings to Cyprus and Bahrain with this.
It's worth noting that PA474 was once part of the Flight Refuelling Ltd set up, that pioneered AAR way back. I discovered this when detailed as team leader for the refurbishment of the aircrafts mainplanes at Abingdon many moons ago. I suspect that techniques have changed a lot since 474 was trialling techniques. But nice to know that the aircraft also represents technological progress and not just bombing.
The aircrafts history from the MOD site says ;
"On return to the United Kingdom, PA474 was loaned to Flight Refuelling Ltd at Tarrant Rushton to be used as a pilotless drone, an uncertain future, which would likely have led to her loss. Fortunately, however, before the conversion started, the Air Ministry decided to use a different type of aircraft for the drone programme (a Lincoln) and PA474 was reprieved. She was then transferred to the Royal College of Aeronautics at Cranfield where she was used as a trial platform for the testing of various experimental aerofoil sections between 1954 and 1964; the trial wings being mounted vertically on the upper rear fuselage."
Thank goodness the drone trials were not followed through.
Smudge
The aircrafts history from the MOD site says ;
"On return to the United Kingdom, PA474 was loaned to Flight Refuelling Ltd at Tarrant Rushton to be used as a pilotless drone, an uncertain future, which would likely have led to her loss. Fortunately, however, before the conversion started, the Air Ministry decided to use a different type of aircraft for the drone programme (a Lincoln) and PA474 was reprieved. She was then transferred to the Royal College of Aeronautics at Cranfield where she was used as a trial platform for the testing of various experimental aerofoil sections between 1954 and 1964; the trial wings being mounted vertically on the upper rear fuselage."
Thank goodness the drone trials were not followed through.
Smudge
Slight thread drift on the subject of cup holders.
I once went for a design review at Warton during the MRA4 days. Waste-of-space were quite chuffed that a swing-out cup holder could also be used to hang the operator's head-set on when he wasn't wearing it.
Mind you it was no good if it had a cup in it. Probably why they cancelled it...
I once went for a design review at Warton during the MRA4 days. Waste-of-space were quite chuffed that a swing-out cup holder could also be used to hang the operator's head-set on when he wasn't wearing it.
Mind you it was no good if it had a cup in it. Probably why they cancelled it...
D-IFF_ident wrote:
Whereas, in contrast, the A310MRTT systems provide the Air Refuelling Operator with a moving map, a TACAN BHDI (with continuous automatic RV turn range calculation), a simple fuel system synoptic display, a fuel vs. UTC or fuel vs. Distance to Destination display, automatic offload logging, continuous flight plan updating and the ability to manage refuelling plans as necessary.
Why does the A310MRTT have all this but the A330MRTT doesn't? Because the A310MRTT designers used AAR SMEs whereas the A330MRTT designers (certainly those who have comprehensively failed to deliver a working mission system) didn't - they relied primarily on engineers who had no experience of the role whatsoever or ex-USAF boom operators...
Neither would they accept many offers of assistance from the A310MRTT team....
An ATr suit dared to tell me that "The Voyager is a 2+1 crew aircraft - it only needs the MSO during tanking". Which meant that he had absolutely no understanding of basic tanker CRM.....
The MSO has great SA on where the receivers are, once they're in close formation, no SA on where they are themselves or where the receivers are before they join the formation unless the pilots tell them. That's not entirely true though, they could have great SA beyond the vision system once all available avionics/mission systems are cleared for use.
Why does the A310MRTT have all this but the A330MRTT doesn't? Because the A310MRTT designers used AAR SMEs whereas the A330MRTT designers (certainly those who have comprehensively failed to deliver a working mission system) didn't - they relied primarily on engineers who had no experience of the role whatsoever or ex-USAF boom operators...
Neither would they accept many offers of assistance from the A310MRTT team....An ATr suit dared to tell me that "The Voyager is a 2+1 crew aircraft - it only needs the MSO during tanking". Which meant that he had absolutely no understanding of basic tanker CRM.....