Anyone have a link to the infamous Cranwell F4 flypast?
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Planet Claire
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice beat up in the '97 IOT' YouTube link, but didn't look very dangerous to me- although never flown a Phantom..
Add me to the list of folk keen to see the 'other' footage.
Add me to the list of folk keen to see the 'other' footage.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
'ihoharv' inquired:
AFAIK 'Alan Pollock' went to RAAF Pearce to become a QFI with the RAAF subsequently.
IN HIS OWN WORDS: http://www.rafjever.org/4sqnper004.htm
&
http://www.rafjever.org/pictures-4/4sqnpic424.jpg
Hunter/Tower Bridge
anybody know what the Hunter pilot - Flt Lt Alan Pollock - went on to do post-RAF following his "medical discharge"? If he's still with us he'd be about 80 today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker...ridge_incident
anybody know what the Hunter pilot - Flt Lt Alan Pollock - went on to do post-RAF following his "medical discharge"? If he's still with us he'd be about 80 today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker...ridge_incident
IN HIS OWN WORDS: http://www.rafjever.org/4sqnper004.htm
&
http://www.rafjever.org/pictures-4/4sqnpic424.jpg
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 17th Dec 2016 at 05:54. Reason: add URL + GIF
'ihoharv' inquired:
Quote:
Hunter/Tower Bridge
anybody know what the Hunter pilot - Flt Lt Alan Pollock - went on to do post-RAF following his "medical discharge"? If he's still with us he'd be about 80 today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker...ridge_incident
AFAIK 'Alan Pollock' went to RAAF Pearce to become a QFI with the RAAF subsequently.
Quote:
Hunter/Tower Bridge
anybody know what the Hunter pilot - Flt Lt Alan Pollock - went on to do post-RAF following his "medical discharge"? If he's still with us he'd be about 80 today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker...ridge_incident
AFAIK 'Alan Pollock' went to RAAF Pearce to become a QFI with the RAAF subsequently.
anybody know what the Hunter pilot - Flt Lt Alan Pollock - went on to do post-RAF following his "medical discharge"? If he's still with us he'd be about 80 today.
I saw its when at IFS and it was used in FS lectures. Never seen it anywhere else. After 30 years, perhaps it might be released as many other official 'documents' are.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I believe on of the navs was Darryl Rodgers (sic) OC Ops design RAF Leuchars who had 6 months loss of seniority.
Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 18th Dec 2016 at 21:25.
For the uninitiated amongst us, was the problem that he pulled up from low level (below the briefed altitude say) with full burner on and blew off some hats, or that he was too low on the flypast and had to use full burner to stop himself being spread all over the parade ground?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
T1, I'll stick my neck out and say both. Ultimately flying indiscipline. Many of us have been there, few have been seen on video. Today you might say few are not on video.
Bit of thread drift but I did manage to invert the beer tent at San Nicole with wing-tip jobbers in the '80s. Lusty also had to check the mainmast aerials after my last disembarkment. Fortunately no vid! There was, however HUD film of us at 5-15' on the attack run into Stanley on 1st May '82. Ahh, swing the lamp!
Off to polish me Tiger.
Mog
Off to polish me Tiger.
Mog
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Wilts
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cash47 says that immediately after, flustered DS were rushing around asking for photo/video footage:
1. No we were not (rushing around or flustered).
2. Heads down - didn't see nothing my lud...............
1. No we were not (rushing around or flustered).
2. Heads down - didn't see nothing my lud...............
Mogwi
Hello Mogwi - could you elaborate about the HUD height and how it was calibrated to the aircraft - i.e. was it from the bottom of the gun packs and only when S and L? (RadAlt)
or was it Barometric but imprecise?
The main reason I ask is obviously lower the better in that situation but curious as how you know how far to roll at such a low height.
Also how did that compare to 'normal training' heights you were used to?
Thanks
or was it Barometric but imprecise?
The main reason I ask is obviously lower the better in that situation but curious as how you know how far to roll at such a low height.
Also how did that compare to 'normal training' heights you were used to?
Thanks
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We covered this on the Flying Supervisors Course at Bentley Priory, along with Bud Holland and the Puma that run out of fuel and landed on a parade square in the middle of a parade somewhere in Europe.
Twas a long time ago and I'm sure there are better informed than me out there, but I seem to recall the root cause was thought to be a badly planned display, requiring said infringer to over cook a turn or something. The guy who briefed us seemed to think the pilot did a good job not parking it in CHOM.
more than happy to be flamed if wrong...just reporting what I recall for from a very good course, with a lot of "hidden insights" 15 years ago.
Twas a long time ago and I'm sure there are better informed than me out there, but I seem to recall the root cause was thought to be a badly planned display, requiring said infringer to over cook a turn or something. The guy who briefed us seemed to think the pilot did a good job not parking it in CHOM.
more than happy to be flamed if wrong...just reporting what I recall for from a very good course, with a lot of "hidden insights" 15 years ago.
If it is the Mogwi that I am thinking off, I was stood as a young Middy on the port sponson on Ark Royal in about 1987/8 during his final flight and he was half way between the sponson and the water with a huge rooster tail of water following behind. 5-10 feet my estimate and doing about 300 knots!!
Hello Mogwi - could you elaborate about the HUD height and how it was calibrated to the aircraft - i.e. was it from the bottom of the gun packs and only when S and L? (RadAlt)
or was it Barometric but imprecise?
The main reason I ask is obviously lower the better in that situation but curious as how you know how far to roll at such a low height.
Also how did that compare to 'normal training' heights you were used to?
Thanks
or was it Barometric but imprecise?
The main reason I ask is obviously lower the better in that situation but curious as how you know how far to roll at such a low height.
Also how did that compare to 'normal training' heights you were used to?
Thanks
As I recall, the radio altimeter aerial was pretty much under the cockpit, so a foot or so above the bottom of the gunpods. Don't know if it was calibrated to take account of this but then those sort of heights were probably not in the spec! Normal training heights for the RN were down to 50' over the sea but normally restricted to 250' over land and roll restriction was purely eyeball! The radalt obviously over-read when not in level flight.
There was also bar alt in the HUD but that relied on the correct/accurate setting to give true height and was only really used for ATC purposes.
I remember my late father (ex Seafire driver) telling me that the lowest safe height to fly was half your wingspan, so you could always get 90 degrees of bank!
Don't know about affect on hats, but it had an effect on my long-johns!
If it is the Mogwi that I am thinking off, I was stood as a young Middy on the port sponson on Ark Royal in about 1987/8 during his final flight and he was half way between the sponson and the water with a huge rooster tail of water following behind. 5-10 feet my estimate and doing about 300 knots!!
Yes, tactically unsound but great fun! You could see the "snail trail" from about 30 miles from height, on a good day. Same applies to helos flown "tactically" over water, as I once found to my advantage!
Mog
Mog,
Indeed - which is why we did an overwater demo on the course. Flying at 20 ft over the water gains you very little except a wake - the same, of course, over dust, sand and snow...The more time you spend avoiding hitting the ground, the less time you've got to look for other threats. The time for 10-20ft is over a desert locked up by an RF SAM (whether the enemy's or, indeed, your own....).
I think the Cranwell flypast has been somewhat relegated in recent years on the FSS by a certain Typhoon incident. Most amusingly, I was on the FSS with the said pilot and his "version of events" was somewhat different to the Chain of Command's....clearly, the D Staff hadn't all been briefed as there were a few awkward shuffles when the presenter started with "let me tell you what this muppet did...." (or words to that effect...).
Indeed - which is why we did an overwater demo on the course. Flying at 20 ft over the water gains you very little except a wake - the same, of course, over dust, sand and snow...The more time you spend avoiding hitting the ground, the less time you've got to look for other threats. The time for 10-20ft is over a desert locked up by an RF SAM (whether the enemy's or, indeed, your own....).
I think the Cranwell flypast has been somewhat relegated in recent years on the FSS by a certain Typhoon incident. Most amusingly, I was on the FSS with the said pilot and his "version of events" was somewhat different to the Chain of Command's....clearly, the D Staff hadn't all been briefed as there were a few awkward shuffles when the presenter started with "let me tell you what this muppet did...." (or words to that effect...).