Maritime Monday
Naming of parts.....
.....I believe that same problem afflicted the Victor tanker conversions; all those complex blended shaped panels were individually "fettled" to fit "that" aircraft and wouldn't fit any other. Must have been bloody frustrating for the guys doing the job - I have a mental picture of an overall-clad chap rootling about in wire cages of panels effin' and blindin' to himself as looked for a particular bit.
The Ancient Mariner
The Ancient Mariner
Gentleman Aviator
Measurements carried out across the fleet identified that the delta between the longest and shortest airframe was in the region of 18 inches!
There was to be (allegedly) a publicity photie with them all lined up neatly side-by-side on the pan.
When it was dicovered you could line up the front (prop) ......
..... or line up the back (tail) ........
..... but not both!!
Any truth in that? Good dit anyway.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sneaking up on the Runway and leaping out to grab it unawares
Age: 61
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No idea about that tale, but whilst I was on Doms at Finningley one of the TinCans took a birdstrike.
When the repair panels arrived from Shorts not one of them fitted!
When the repair panels arrived from Shorts not one of them fitted!
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do the rules permit adding content on a Phriday?
Re BEgles pic at #23. We had 3 aircraft at the time I was involved. I can't remember which one it was but one had an extra frame in the tail cone area just aft of the back hatch. It was at least 6" longer. and not recorded on the BAe type records or drawings. This came to the fore when we were doing a waveguide installation so ended up with a set of templates for all 3 aircraft. I think the hole had been cut between two frames for the horn to poke out through a little window (too small to see in any pictures) and the wave guide that had all been brazed up and silver plated would not reach. Thank the lord for the short flexible bits!
The TuRD installation was also impacted by this difference and covered by a note on the drawings "fettle to fit". I don't think TuRD was fitted at the time of BEagles picture. It would have been a few weeks later.
Re BEgles pic at #23. We had 3 aircraft at the time I was involved. I can't remember which one it was but one had an extra frame in the tail cone area just aft of the back hatch. It was at least 6" longer. and not recorded on the BAe type records or drawings. This came to the fore when we were doing a waveguide installation so ended up with a set of templates for all 3 aircraft. I think the hole had been cut between two frames for the horn to poke out through a little window (too small to see in any pictures) and the wave guide that had all been brazed up and silver plated would not reach. Thank the lord for the short flexible bits!
The TuRD installation was also impacted by this difference and covered by a note on the drawings "fettle to fit". I don't think TuRD was fitted at the time of BEagles picture. It would have been a few weeks later.
I was enroute from Lyneham to Akrotiri in a Britannia when number two engine tried to shed it's cowling near Rome one night. I diverted to Luqa where the engineers decided to replace the whole cowling with one from the spare Proteus stored in the MU at Safi. It took seven hours of filing, sawing and hammering to get the damn thing to fit. Sometimes, they told me, it was quicker to change the complete power plant due to manufacturing variations.
Nice to see the Sunderland picture. A civilised aircraft with a galley.
Thank goodness, everything aforesaid suggests that just like Human beings (who fly them) aircraft are mostly individual. A situation that I'm sure keeps our professional yoke jockeys on their toes, and our media in "tales of how dangerous flying is"! The C130 was to all intents and purposes a mass production jobby, but I bet most Airframe fitters could tell a story or two about replacing a NACA (pronounced Knacker) duct intake on the RAF C130K.
Smudge
Smudge
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,959
Received 2,858 Likes
on
1,225 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,563
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
Forgive a quick return to the Nimrod AEW 3, but to answer a question and to correct a couple of things said earlier....
The radar was rubbish and the aircraft was not anywhere near the standard to enter service. I believe that the performance of the mission system remains classified but it may well prove interesting when the 30 years since cancellation arrives in a year or so and the final "trial" results are released to the public. You may well see why it was cancelled.
Contrary to a previous comment - the mission system cooling system was anything but elegant! It was cooled by circulating fuel from the aircraft's fuel tanks - however, to keep it working you needed more than half fuel load! Not very good for time on task or indeed having to take up most of the RAF's refuelling capability to do so.
The radar was rubbish and the aircraft was not anywhere near the standard to enter service. I believe that the performance of the mission system remains classified but it may well prove interesting when the 30 years since cancellation arrives in a year or so and the final "trial" results are released to the public. You may well see why it was cancelled.
Contrary to a previous comment - the mission system cooling system was anything but elegant! It was cooled by circulating fuel from the aircraft's fuel tanks - however, to keep it working you needed more than half fuel load! Not very good for time on task or indeed having to take up most of the RAF's refuelling capability to do so.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
