Typhoon Trail to Nellis.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Back from the sandpit
Age: 63
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice to see the Voyager and little jets arrived on time in Las Vegas.
On the social side, this will probably be the last time that 5 Air Engineers will be enjoying each other's company in Vegas and it's associated environs <REDACTED>
It was fun boys, hope you have a great trip back.
On the social side, this will probably be the last time that 5 Air Engineers will be enjoying each other's company in Vegas and it's associated environs <REDACTED>
It was fun boys, hope you have a great trip back.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vasco,
I can only agree with you. There must be something wrong with the planning or the execution. We have done many trails across the Atlantic via numerous routes. I would question why they went so far south? Was it due to available staging points?
I can only agree with you. There must be something wrong with the planning or the execution. We have done many trails across the Atlantic via numerous routes. I would question why they went so far south? Was it due to available staging points?
6foottanker wrote:
Mate, why the harshness? I can assure you that vascodegama most assuredly does know what he's talking about - but the reason for the large number of brackets than would seem normal is perplexing. An intellectual query as to why doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
Vasco,
Listen to regie and stop talking like you have a clue what you're on about. Or are you a bluntie in disguise?!?
Listen to regie and stop talking like you have a clue what you're on about. Or are you a bluntie in disguise?!?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Back from the sandpit
Age: 63
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TankerTrashNav wrote
Well that confirms you are/were a Nav. The Tam O'Shanter wasn't downtown but mid-East strip on the site that is now the Venetian's sister property, the Palazzo 
We stayed in the Tam O'Shanter motel in downtown Las Vegas. I looked it up online a few years back and found a website where people were mourning the demolition of one of Las Vegas's "heritage" buildings. It was built c1957!
Yes ok - downtown wasn't quite right - but the TOS's location would have fitted into one of my astro cocked hats as well as the downtown area, such were my navigation skills 
However it was a convenient walk to Caesar's Palace and one or two other large casinos so it suited us fine.
As the imprest holder I had a fairly large sum in US$ which had to go straight into the hotel safe wherever we were staying. The idea of taking it down to Caesar's Palace and sticking it all on red did flit across my mind, but fortunately I resisted the temptation.
However it was a convenient walk to Caesar's Palace and one or two other large casinos so it suited us fine.As the imprest holder I had a fairly large sum in US$ which had to go straight into the hotel safe wherever we were staying. The idea of taking it down to Caesar's Palace and sticking it all on red did flit across my mind, but fortunately I resisted the temptation.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typhoon Trail to Nellis.
The southerly route is due to it being WINTER...have you tried getting receivers airborne in snow and -20 degree temps in Newfie this time of year??
Actually yes. Taking the participants to Red Flag always seemed to happen around new year time and I have vivid memories of crewing into aircraft in the hangar at Goose before being towed out to start. There was, for reasons I never understood a complete reluctance back then to use the Southern Route. Penny pinching I suspect.
Actually yes. Taking the participants to Red Flag always seemed to happen around new year time and I have vivid memories of crewing into aircraft in the hangar at Goose before being towed out to start. There was, for reasons I never understood a complete reluctance back then to use the Southern Route. Penny pinching I suspect.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
Yes, I well remember those trails via Goose direct to LAS. If all went well one overnight and only 11 hours flying time. But that was when we cruised at FL350/M0.8. I also well remember the crewing in inside the hangar at Goose (which was OK). I also remember trying to launch from Halifax operating off a poorly de-iced, sloping GA pan in the middle of February! Closest LOX at Greenwood and Nimrod u/s again!
Best trip back was Halifax direct CGY. Missed out Laajes since 150kts on the tail most of the way.
I was always an advocate of the Southern Route in the winter. The difficulty seemed to be to find a single airfield that would/could accept Fast Jets, AAR and Advanced/Sweep C130. I know that after 9-11 everything became far more difficult.
Best trip back was Halifax direct CGY. Missed out Laajes since 150kts on the tail most of the way.
I was always an advocate of the Southern Route in the winter. The difficulty seemed to be to find a single airfield that would/could accept Fast Jets, AAR and Advanced/Sweep C130. I know that after 9-11 everything became far more difficult.
Can two fighters air refuel simultaneously from the wing pods ?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One got in 4s...
http://www.xf90.com/images/R3Y-2/R3Y-2-300.jpg
R3Y Tradewind refuelling F9F-8 Cougars Sept 6 1956
http://www.xf90.com/images/R3Y-2/R3Y-2-300.jpg
FOR RELEASE AT 3:00 P.M. (PDT) THURSDAY, SEPT. 6, 1956 Four Navy jet fighters take on fuel from a Convair R3Y-2 "Tradewind" in the first multiple refueling operation ever conducted from a seaplane. The 80-ton "Tradewind" transport carries enough fuel in its wing tanks for eight fighters.
That's a better copy of the 4 Cougars refuelling from the Tradewind than I've seen before, GreenKnight121, thanks for posting it and the links.
The RAF didn't attempt simultaneous refuelling of 3 aircraft from the VC10K - wing clearance would have been an issue as would the slower formation movement of 3 aircraft. For the air engineer to monitor 3 receivers on 2 different systems would have been difficult even if the transfer system itself could have coped.
Back to the Lajes-Bermuda trail, I gather that the 90 min requirement led to a track some 9% longer than great circle. Refuelling to less than full, a high arrival fuel at Bermuda, the slow Typhoon onload rate and single hose compatibility would certainly have required more brackets than were used historically - even without the significant headwinds on part of the route.
Is the RAF still using the same interval between sub-brackets for single hose as it does for two hoses? Even though there's far less receiver movement? Another planning system uses 3 min between sub-brackets for a 2 hose plan, but 2 min for a single hose plan - which is rather more logical, in my opinion.
The RAF didn't attempt simultaneous refuelling of 3 aircraft from the VC10K - wing clearance would have been an issue as would the slower formation movement of 3 aircraft. For the air engineer to monitor 3 receivers on 2 different systems would have been difficult even if the transfer system itself could have coped.
Back to the Lajes-Bermuda trail, I gather that the 90 min requirement led to a track some 9% longer than great circle. Refuelling to less than full, a high arrival fuel at Bermuda, the slow Typhoon onload rate and single hose compatibility would certainly have required more brackets than were used historically - even without the significant headwinds on part of the route.
Is the RAF still using the same interval between sub-brackets for single hose as it does for two hoses? Even though there's far less receiver movement? Another planning system uses 3 min between sub-brackets for a 2 hose plan, but 2 min for a single hose plan - which is rather more logical, in my opinion.
As reported elsewhere:
An RAF spokesman said: 'We start planning the trail four weeks in advance and while we've been conducting trails for many years each one is different.
'When we get tasked we plan the route and determine where each air-air refuelling will take place. This then gives us the information we require to obtain diplomatic clearances and to book airspace.
'When trailing fast jets over long distances we need to remain within 90 minutes of a diversion airfield lest we have any problem with one of the aircraft.
'We also have to factor in the sea temperature to ensure that in the unlikely event of a pilot having to eject that they are able to survive in the water for as long as possible.'
'When we get tasked we plan the route and determine where each air-air refuelling will take place. This then gives us the information we require to obtain diplomatic clearances and to book airspace.
'When trailing fast jets over long distances we need to remain within 90 minutes of a diversion airfield lest we have any problem with one of the aircraft.
'We also have to factor in the sea temperature to ensure that in the unlikely event of a pilot having to eject that they are able to survive in the water for as long as possible.'
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
BEagle,
Thanks for restating all of the info but my question is, why 90 mins? How was that time decided? Is it the same for single engined and twin engined fast jets? 90 mins would appear to be a bit arbitrary or is it based on certain criteria?
Thanks for restating all of the info but my question is, why 90 mins? How was that time decided? Is it the same for single engined and twin engined fast jets? 90 mins would appear to be a bit arbitrary or is it based on certain criteria?
Great picture Greenknight, and thanks for the info on the VC10 Beagle
Boxmover - singleton aircraft preferred the centreline because the faster rate of fuel transfer meant a shorter time in contact. In my era, Phantoms and Buccaneers in particular preferred the centreline as they could take on considerable amounts of fuel. With Lightnings it was little and often - in the case of the F3 very often!
Boxmover - singleton aircraft preferred the centreline because the faster rate of fuel transfer meant a shorter time in contact. In my era, Phantoms and Buccaneers in particular preferred the centreline as they could take on considerable amounts of fuel. With Lightnings it was little and often - in the case of the F3 very often!
Dominator2, I don't know why the 90 min figure has been adopted. I vaguely remember back on the F4 we didn't like being more than 90 min away from a div when flying on QRA - IIRC?
The Victor had rather a slow transfer rate from the Mk20 pods compared with the HDU, whereas the VC10K had a much better rate from the Mk32s. Again, with the F4 we preferred the Victor centreline as it was so much faster than the wing hoses and suited the F4 onload rate better, but the Tornado onload rate is slower, so less of an issue. But as for the Typhoon onload rate....
The Victor had rather a slow transfer rate from the Mk20 pods compared with the HDU, whereas the VC10K had a much better rate from the Mk32s. Again, with the F4 we preferred the Victor centreline as it was so much faster than the wing hoses and suited the F4 onload rate better, but the Tornado onload rate is slower, so less of an issue. But as for the Typhoon onload rate....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
BEagle,
Thanks for the reply. I also did QRA for over 30 years and far as I can recall the rule was to always stay within single engine range of a usable diversion unless specifically ordered by the ADC. The rules did not say whether you were expected to keep the External Stores or not!
The principal of staying within single engine range was the same as I always attached to trails that I was responsible for. For many years the STC AAR Planning Rules made no mention of single engine range. Maybe they were written by a Lightning pilot since that ac could go further on one than two!
Unfortunately. the two that I flew reduced range by almost a third on one engine.
Today a wag (Ex 101) said to me that the 13 brackets sounds as though 1 Sqn picked up a Harrier Trail Brief!!
Wait for it!!
Thanks for the reply. I also did QRA for over 30 years and far as I can recall the rule was to always stay within single engine range of a usable diversion unless specifically ordered by the ADC. The rules did not say whether you were expected to keep the External Stores or not!
The principal of staying within single engine range was the same as I always attached to trails that I was responsible for. For many years the STC AAR Planning Rules made no mention of single engine range. Maybe they were written by a Lightning pilot since that ac could go further on one than two!
Unfortunately. the two that I flew reduced range by almost a third on one engine.
Today a wag (Ex 101) said to me that the 13 brackets sounds as though 1 Sqn picked up a Harrier Trail Brief!!
Wait for it!!
Last edited by Dominator2; 14th Jan 2015 at 17:39. Reason: grammar
