Gnat down at CarFest
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stitchbitch
Self and colleagues used g-suits (as they seemed to be known then) underneath both standard flying suits and immersion suits. "Internal" use was mandated to minimise snagging inside what is a very snug front cockpit and what I thought was an even snugger rear seat - an impression gained during a couple of formation leads I sat in the back for (instructor in front), to take photos of the formators, of the "look mum, here I am in a Gnat" variety (is that still allowed or does a risk assessment now preclude it?).
As noted earlier in the thread did the ex-Gnat fliers here all wear internal Anti-G trousers?
We all had 'internal' turning trousers in my day - I think that they were bespoke to the Gnat as IIRC the hose was on the opposite side to the Hunter's system?
I last flew the Gnat in 1975; in 1982 I had to do some 'clothing card check' prior to being posted and found that the 'system' thought that I still had a Gnat oxygen mask and anti-g suit. Even though the RAF had no Gnats left in service and the kit didn't fit anything else, they wouldn't believe that I'd handed it all in at Valley 7 years earlier.... But a Chf Tech in stores (with whom I worked at the gliding club) came to the rescue - he solemnly wrote out a couple of 'scrap' labels for the mythical kit and it was duly written-off....
I last flew the Gnat in 1975; in 1982 I had to do some 'clothing card check' prior to being posted and found that the 'system' thought that I still had a Gnat oxygen mask and anti-g suit. Even though the RAF had no Gnats left in service and the kit didn't fit anything else, they wouldn't believe that I'd handed it all in at Valley 7 years earlier.... But a Chf Tech in stores (with whom I worked at the gliding club) came to the rescue - he solemnly wrote out a couple of 'scrap' labels for the mythical kit and it was duly written-off....
Fluffy Bunny, one would hope so.
highcirrus and BEagle, thanks, the Gnat cockpit looks very cramped. I last saw some RH tube speed slacks when I was in a dark corner at Boscombe, must have been left overs from VAAc, when I went to test them / get rid of them, the bladder had deteriorated to such an extent that they leaked like a collinder.
highcirrus and BEagle, thanks, the Gnat cockpit looks very cramped. I last saw some RH tube speed slacks when I was in a dark corner at Boscombe, must have been left overs from VAAc, when I went to test them / get rid of them, the bladder had deteriorated to such an extent that they leaked like a collinder.
The Gnat cockpit was compact, it is true. But once you were strapped in with the simple harness with which the Folland seat was fitted, it was fine - everything was within easy reach (apart from the ILS selector box) and for people of normal stature, it was very comfortable.
Whereas although the Hunter 6/9 had a bigger cockpit, some switches were a pig to reach. If you wore a Mk2 bonedome, the starter button could only be reached with the finger tips. The Mk2/3 Martin Baker seats were a bondish-fetishist's wet dream (or so I understand), with individual parachute and seat harnesses into which you had to truss yourself....and the leg-strangler cords were a real pain - whereas the Gnat had permanently fitted leg restraint garters which you just clicked on. Trying to find and reset the inverter CBs required the sort of dexterity (or should that be sinisterity?) exhibited by James Herriot with his arm up inside some unfortunate farmyard creature's nether regions...
Whereas although the Hunter 6/9 had a bigger cockpit, some switches were a pig to reach. If you wore a Mk2 bonedome, the starter button could only be reached with the finger tips. The Mk2/3 Martin Baker seats were a bondish-fetishist's wet dream (or so I understand), with individual parachute and seat harnesses into which you had to truss yourself....and the leg-strangler cords were a real pain - whereas the Gnat had permanently fitted leg restraint garters which you just clicked on. Trying to find and reset the inverter CBs required the sort of dexterity (or should that be sinisterity?) exhibited by James Herriot with his arm up inside some unfortunate farmyard creature's nether regions...
A fund has been set up to help Kevin's wife, daughter and his unborn daughter...
Kevin Whyman Memorial Fund - GoGetFunding | GoGetFunding
On Saturday 1st August 2015 at precisely 2pm, former RAF pilot, Kevin Whyman, tragically lost his life when his jet plane crashed during a display show at the Carfest charity festival at Oulton Park, Cheshire.
The friends of Kevin and Alexandra Whyman would like to express their gratitude to all the people who have sent messages of support at this most difficult time.
Alexandra is four months pregnant and expecting Kevin’s second daughter which adds to the difficulty of this situation. Kevin was a wonderful and loving father and would have relished being a dad to two girls.
Many people have contacted us and asked about donations. Some wish to donate towards the welfare of Kevin’s daughter which obviously now includes his unborn child as well. In light of this we have opened an account.
Others may wish to donate to a charity that Kevin supported and we have nominated Help For Heroes. Kevin was egalitarian and if there is another charity that you would like to make a donation to in memory of Kevin then that is entirely fitting and appropriate.
All that is left to say is thank you once more for all the messages of support. Each and every one means so much to all the family and friends of our much loved Kevin.
Kevin Whyman Memorial Fund - GoGetFunding | GoGetFunding
On Saturday 1st August 2015 at precisely 2pm, former RAF pilot, Kevin Whyman, tragically lost his life when his jet plane crashed during a display show at the Carfest charity festival at Oulton Park, Cheshire.
The friends of Kevin and Alexandra Whyman would like to express their gratitude to all the people who have sent messages of support at this most difficult time.
Alexandra is four months pregnant and expecting Kevin’s second daughter which adds to the difficulty of this situation. Kevin was a wonderful and loving father and would have relished being a dad to two girls.
Many people have contacted us and asked about donations. Some wish to donate towards the welfare of Kevin’s daughter which obviously now includes his unborn child as well. In light of this we have opened an account.
Others may wish to donate to a charity that Kevin supported and we have nominated Help For Heroes. Kevin was egalitarian and if there is another charity that you would like to make a donation to in memory of Kevin then that is entirely fitting and appropriate.
All that is left to say is thank you once more for all the messages of support. Each and every one means so much to all the family and friends of our much loved Kevin.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Tributes to Kevin Whyman | British Rowing
RiP 
He had a very successful rowing career, which began at King’s School Chester and led him to cox the junior men’s coxed four at the 1993 World Junior Championships. After which, he went on to cox Cambridge in the 1996 and 1997 Boat Races, winning on both occasions. Donald Legget, the veteran in the Light Blue coaching team, said “Kevin was one of the best Cambridge coxes I ever witnessed and was responsible for two of the greatest wins of the CUBC.”
Harry Brightmore, a former pupil at King’s School, Chester, said, “He was one of the biggest names at King’s, with his name up on the honours board and more recently had a boat named after him. I hoped to be like Kevin Whyman one day, and so when he came to the boathouse I was a bit star-struck. It was a huge shock when I found out.”
Annamarie Phelps, Chairman of British Rowing, said “Our thoughts are with his family and many friends during this difficult time, and he will be sorely missed by the rowing community.”
There will be a full tribute to Kevin Whyman in the September edition of Rowing and Regatta.
Harry Brightmore, a former pupil at King’s School, Chester, said, “He was one of the biggest names at King’s, with his name up on the honours board and more recently had a boat named after him. I hoped to be like Kevin Whyman one day, and so when he came to the boathouse I was a bit star-struck. It was a huge shock when I found out.”
Annamarie Phelps, Chairman of British Rowing, said “Our thoughts are with his family and many friends during this difficult time, and he will be sorely missed by the rowing community.”
There will be a full tribute to Kevin Whyman in the September edition of Rowing and Regatta.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comfy Cockpit?
BEagle reports "The Gnat cockpit was compact . . for people of normal stature, it was very comfortable". (Sorry, I haven't found the 'auto-quote' button!).
Well, I'd agree 95%, with the awful exception of the immersion suit we wore in 1965. This had separate top and trousers, and was kept watertight by overlapping the rubber waistbands and rolling them together. This produced a fat sausage around the waist which pressed against the ejector seat O2 bottle located (I feel pretty sure) over the right kidney. Misery. Good job we didn't do long sorties . . . Summer came as a great relief.
Well, I'd agree 95%, with the awful exception of the immersion suit we wore in 1965. This had separate top and trousers, and was kept watertight by overlapping the rubber waistbands and rolling them together. This produced a fat sausage around the waist which pressed against the ejector seat O2 bottle located (I feel pretty sure) over the right kidney. Misery. Good job we didn't do long sorties . . . Summer came as a great relief.
Still flying in those awful suits in the Canberra several years later. Then there was the seat pan upgrade trial - and some tw@t put the straps across the "box" so the one that was higher was the side where the sciatic nerve was nearest the surface - consequently you could always tell if someone getting out of the aircraft had been on a "trial" seat - he could barely walk!
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that we are thread-creeping here but didn't that self same suit also incorporate a tube through which the g-suit hose was threaded and then connected to the anti-g system in the cockpit?
I well remember being less than impressed when the bl**dy thing leaked big time during wet dingy drill in Hollyhead Harbour, as I'd apparently failed to secure the thing properly with the tin-opener type key provided for such occasions when no hose was present!
I well remember being less than impressed when the bl**dy thing leaked big time during wet dingy drill in Hollyhead Harbour, as I'd apparently failed to secure the thing properly with the tin-opener type key provided for such occasions when no hose was present!
He didn't row he was a cox, not that it makes a rat's difference in the discussion of this accident. I'll be cold enough to suggest that he should have thought about his leisure time choices with respect to the family responsibilities. We all know about demonstration flying risks. At some point you give something up if you want to be assured that you'll be around to support and raise your children.
My view: low ceiling changed the game and he didn't adapt. Rolled inverted for a pull-through, saw Mother Earth with her arms outstretched to greet him, and pulled a high-g snap. Out of control flick into the ground. But let's wait for the AAIB.
My view: low ceiling changed the game and he didn't adapt. Rolled inverted for a pull-through, saw Mother Earth with her arms outstretched to greet him, and pulled a high-g snap. Out of control flick into the ground. But let's wait for the AAIB.
Nice
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: All Over
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My view: low ceiling changed the game and he didn't adapt. Rolled inverted for a pull-through, saw Mother Earth with her arms outstretched to greet him, and pulled a high-g snap. Out of control flick into the ground.
But let's wait for the AAIB.
Although I don't agree with his assessment, I think you may have missed the full implication of what Malabo was suggesting. I think his idea was that the weather had forced them to a low altitude display and he had still tried to complete the pull through that was a part of the full display. Either that or, as UA and Paracab have suggested, Malabo's use of the term "pull through" is utterly stupid.
I shall say only this, the roll past 90 degrees was loaded and did not look to me even slightly like a deliberate, planned manoeuvre that was part of a display.
I cannot credit Malabo with either a sense of dignity nor much understanding of fast jet flying. I have to ask, why the aggressive, insensitive and utterly flawed post as an entry to the thread? I suspect he has withdrawn to jet blast or wherever he usually lurks. No mention of anything flying related in his profile.
I shall say only this, the roll past 90 degrees was loaded and did not look to me even slightly like a deliberate, planned manoeuvre that was part of a display.
I cannot credit Malabo with either a sense of dignity nor much understanding of fast jet flying. I have to ask, why the aggressive, insensitive and utterly flawed post as an entry to the thread? I suspect he has withdrawn to jet blast or wherever he usually lurks. No mention of anything flying related in his profile.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Copied and pasted for Postertity (in case the weasel deletes his post)
Malabo wrote, and may wish to detract....
I wonder what this says about the attitude of some ppruners to military aviators. Given the risks associated with combat, and indeed training, in military aircraft, the chances of surviving to raise children are not exactly a safe bet.
People do it just the same.
Is Malabo really suggesting that those who go to war, or defend our shores, in aircraft don't care about their family? That's how it reads.
Where is Malabo going to draw the line? Should there be something, anything, that I could give up in order to be assured that I will see my kids get older, please tell me what it is.
If I stop flying for recreation.
If I sell the Audi TT Roadster and buy another Volvo.
If I change my diet and take more exercise, Jogging not Tacevals.
If I sell the BMW K1100LT and stop motorcycling entirely.
Will that prevent me from dying of bowel cancer and never knowing what kind of Grandfather I might have been?
I'm not normally given to expressing such venom at arseholes on the internet, but I say this to Malabo, in response to your disgusting smear without foundation on Kevin's choices.....
He didn't row he was a cox, not that it makes a rat's difference in the discussion of this accident. I'll be cold enough to suggest that he should have thought about his leisure time choices with respect to the family responsibilities. We all know about demonstration flying risks. At some point you give something up if you want to be assured that you'll be around to support and raise your children.
My view: low ceiling changed the game and he didn't adapt. Rolled inverted for a pull-through, saw Mother Earth with her arms outstretched to greet him, and pulled a high-g snap. Out of control flick into the ground. But let's wait for the AAIB.
My view: low ceiling changed the game and he didn't adapt. Rolled inverted for a pull-through, saw Mother Earth with her arms outstretched to greet him, and pulled a high-g snap. Out of control flick into the ground. But let's wait for the AAIB.
I wonder what this says about the attitude of some ppruners to military aviators. Given the risks associated with combat, and indeed training, in military aircraft, the chances of surviving to raise children are not exactly a safe bet.
People do it just the same.
Is Malabo really suggesting that those who go to war, or defend our shores, in aircraft don't care about their family? That's how it reads.
Where is Malabo going to draw the line? Should there be something, anything, that I could give up in order to be assured that I will see my kids get older, please tell me what it is.
If I stop flying for recreation.
If I sell the Audi TT Roadster and buy another Volvo.
If I change my diet and take more exercise, Jogging not Tacevals.
If I sell the BMW K1100LT and stop motorcycling entirely.
Will that prevent me from dying of bowel cancer and never knowing what kind of Grandfather I might have been?
I'm not normally given to expressing such venom at arseholes on the internet, but I say this to Malabo, in response to your disgusting smear without foundation on Kevin's choices.....
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.
malabo's post might well have been too soon after the event for good taste, and perhaps qualifies as 'trolling' on that account, but I'm going to begin by defending him/her against accusations of being 'brain dead'. I hadn't planned to post my analysis of the video footage, but since I've been moved to write I'll record a +1 for that part of the post (although I think it's more likely that the pilot grossly overbanked while looking into the turn, rather than starting a roll-and-pull through). It looks to me like a straightforward case of the bank angle being corrected without noticing the descent that had been established, followed by a late and excessive pull when the proximity of the ground became apparent.
As to the more controversial part of the post, on the personal attitude to risk, I think the denunciation by airpolice is probably a bit strong. It's all very well to say that we're free to take our own risks, and of course we are. But I think it is wrong to say that another's choices are always above criticism - for example, I think most will have felt profoundly uneasy watching the documentary a few years ago about the French free-climber whose kids never knew whether Daddy would be coming home from his latest adventure. My personal view is that the purpose of the activity matters a lot, and so I reject the notion that malabo's criticism of Mr Whyman's attitude to risk automatically implies criticism of all combat pilots with families. I think there's something about a death in the line of duty (of any sort, military or civilian) that helps families to make sense of their loss.
The 'synchro' slot on the Reds is selected from three full-time individuals who've already been through an exacting selection a year earlier, and who've earned above average assessments when compared to their peers in productive military flying even to get to that selection. So, while not reaching French free climber-levels, I must admit to feeling a degree of unease at the notion that someone could maintain the level of performance to fly a 'synchro'-type display on a part-time basis without a deep reservoir of full-time experience to fall back on, and without the forces of competitive selection to ensure the maintenance of the highest-possible standards. Heck, we've seen the professional formation aerobatic teams get bitten enough times over the years as it is, even with those elements in place. For me, there was enough risk in this situation for it not to count as just another way of passing the time.
Beyond expressing my general unease, I'm not going to follow malabo in offering a specific judgement - for a start, I don't know enough about Mr Whyman's flying ability or Gnat experience. Eventually, enough will be publicly known, and that will be the time for discussion regarding the ability and experience level required to safely conduct fast jet formation aerobatic displays.
As to the more controversial part of the post, on the personal attitude to risk, I think the denunciation by airpolice is probably a bit strong. It's all very well to say that we're free to take our own risks, and of course we are. But I think it is wrong to say that another's choices are always above criticism - for example, I think most will have felt profoundly uneasy watching the documentary a few years ago about the French free-climber whose kids never knew whether Daddy would be coming home from his latest adventure. My personal view is that the purpose of the activity matters a lot, and so I reject the notion that malabo's criticism of Mr Whyman's attitude to risk automatically implies criticism of all combat pilots with families. I think there's something about a death in the line of duty (of any sort, military or civilian) that helps families to make sense of their loss.
The 'synchro' slot on the Reds is selected from three full-time individuals who've already been through an exacting selection a year earlier, and who've earned above average assessments when compared to their peers in productive military flying even to get to that selection. So, while not reaching French free climber-levels, I must admit to feeling a degree of unease at the notion that someone could maintain the level of performance to fly a 'synchro'-type display on a part-time basis without a deep reservoir of full-time experience to fall back on, and without the forces of competitive selection to ensure the maintenance of the highest-possible standards. Heck, we've seen the professional formation aerobatic teams get bitten enough times over the years as it is, even with those elements in place. For me, there was enough risk in this situation for it not to count as just another way of passing the time.
Beyond expressing my general unease, I'm not going to follow malabo in offering a specific judgement - for a start, I don't know enough about Mr Whyman's flying ability or Gnat experience. Eventually, enough will be publicly known, and that will be the time for discussion regarding the ability and experience level required to safely conduct fast jet formation aerobatic displays.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy Street,
A good, well-considered and thoughtful post IMHO (disclaimer, not being a pilot, I refer to paragraphs 2, 3 & 4).
Whilst accepting parts of Air Polices post, I too believe it is too extreme. In particular...
The answer to this rhetorical question is: "it says absolutely nothing." Out of respect for the deceased and his family, I won't expand on my reasoning, but it should be pretty obvious.
This accident is bound to raise and maintain an interest amongst aviators, and so it should - it is not that hard to maintain a respectful discussion if people try.
A good, well-considered and thoughtful post IMHO (disclaimer, not being a pilot, I refer to paragraphs 2, 3 & 4).
Whilst accepting parts of Air Polices post, I too believe it is too extreme. In particular...
I wonder what this says about the attitude of some ppruners to military aviators
This accident is bound to raise and maintain an interest amongst aviators, and so it should - it is not that hard to maintain a respectful discussion if people try.