Aircraft Lengths of Service
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B52...still going - and planned to go for some time yet...I think 2040 was mentioned?
Wot no Anson?
Avro Anson entered service in the late thirties and was still going strong in the sixties!!
The Valients had spar problems ,that's why they were retired early.
The Valients had spar problems ,that's why they were retired early.
The Valiant, and also the Sperrin, was designed and built in a hurry as the RAF were not confident that the Victor and Vulcan could achieve all that was promised and compared with the other two its performance was mediocre.
It soldiered on as a tanker and as a low level bomber but the natural, not fatigue related, deterioration of its main spars brought its service to an end
It soldiered on as a tanker and as a low level bomber but the natural, not fatigue related, deterioration of its main spars brought its service to an end
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It soldiered on as a tanker and as a low level bomber but the natural, not fatigue related, deterioration of its main spars brought its service to an end
S-D
The corrosion was at Station Zero in the main spar mounting points. The wings were attached by large rivets and when they were reamed out to check the corrosion level sometimes there were just handfuls of powder.
Some of the later ones were cleared for normal service, some ferried under restricted flying to a repair organisation; St Athan/Bristol and others grounded on the spot. However, it was an ideal opportunity for Harold Wilson to step out of the SACEUR nuclear agreement so they were all scrapped.
Some of the later ones were cleared for normal service, some ferried under restricted flying to a repair organisation; St Athan/Bristol and others grounded on the spot. However, it was an ideal opportunity for Harold Wilson to step out of the SACEUR nuclear agreement so they were all scrapped.
Last edited by Fareastdriver; 18th Sep 2015 at 10:41.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
I would have to agree with Danny42c, #2, in that the Spitfire (possibly Hurricane) might hold the record as both are still in service with BBMF, it may have been retired by the Irish Air Force in 61, the RAF still operate the type, and certainly precede the Lanacaster for in service date.
Same with most other "long service" RAF aircraft. The name remained, but the old airframes did not. Arguably, the last true squadron flight by a Britsh Spitfire was in 1955, in Hong Kong, with the RHKAAF. The aircraft had gone from Mk1 to the Mk24 in that time.
The VC10 and the Puma HC1 have got to be very near the top of the "real" long service list. As Fareastdriver wrote, the RAF's Puma HC1s date from 1971 and remain in operational use, doing exactly the same job. Despite having been having been upgraded to Mk2 specification, some are fundamentally the same airframes under new clothes.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will soon be the aviation equivalent of Trigger's broom, if it isn't already.
Lots of new wiggly gubbins inside, but then that's needed for front line combat aircraft rather than raf nostalgia-trip stuff.
Can I drift this Thread a bit?
Caught the last 30mins of High Flight last night and noticed the serials of a couple of the Hunter F4's , (WV333 and WV362 if you're asking) I then went onto "UKSerials" and looked to see if they were still around maybe.
Quite the opposite in fact they were built in 1955 and scrapped in 1959, and looking at the rest of this batch most seemed to suffer the same fate, why such a short life for what must have been a costly bit of kit in those days?
Drift Off
Caught the last 30mins of High Flight last night and noticed the serials of a couple of the Hunter F4's , (WV333 and WV362 if you're asking) I then went onto "UKSerials" and looked to see if they were still around maybe.
Quite the opposite in fact they were built in 1955 and scrapped in 1959, and looking at the rest of this batch most seemed to suffer the same fate, why such a short life for what must have been a costly bit of kit in those days?
Drift Off
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure about the rules for what constitutes "length of service," but the DC-3 first flew in Dec 1935. There are many DC-3s still in commercial service in many parts of the world, and in South Africa they're even still in military service. That's nearly 80 years of service for the type.
As for the longest serving individual airframe, the oldest DC-3 still flying ("The Flagship Detroit") was delivered in March 1937. That's over 78 years of flying service for that airframe. I'm guessing that absent a serious accident, that airframe will likely be flying on its 100th birthday.
As for the longest serving individual airframe, the oldest DC-3 still flying ("The Flagship Detroit") was delivered in March 1937. That's over 78 years of flying service for that airframe. I'm guessing that absent a serious accident, that airframe will likely be flying on its 100th birthday.
And many of the operators of these long serving, great aeroplanes would have had there first air experience in the T21 Sedbergh which I believe served for 38 years. the Cadet MkIII which would have provided the first solo experience was in service for 31 years.
Cliver029,
Possibly something to do with the Duncan Sandys defence review around that time? Lots of squadrons were disbanded, and the overall number of aircraft in the RAF was dramatically reduced on the premise that unmanned vehicles would take over. Looks like Sandys was right, albeit about 60 years too early!
Possibly something to do with the Duncan Sandys defence review around that time? Lots of squadrons were disbanded, and the overall number of aircraft in the RAF was dramatically reduced on the premise that unmanned vehicles would take over. Looks like Sandys was right, albeit about 60 years too early!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
op #24: Valiant R&D was funded 4/48 as insurance against delay/failure of (to be) Victor/Vulcan. Production funding was assisted by 50% US contribution after outbreak of the Korean War, to put something in RAF better than Lincoln (built to 1951!) and resurrected B-29s. There was never intent or infrastructure or crew to retain the type after deployment of the proper bombers.
In 1957 NATO agreed to part-fund an RAF Tactical (nuclear) Bomber Force, initially (2/7/59) Canberra B.6/US Mk.7, wef 1/1/60 Valiant/Mk.5. By Polaris Sales Agreement, 6/4/63, TBF was to be replaced by SSBNs assigned to NATO. On 23/5/63 the Medium Bomber Force in its entirety was assigned to Saceur. Plan on that day was to withdraw Valiants as No. 1 SSBN deployed in 1968, to withdraw the Blue Steel/Yellow Sun Mk.2 Vicor/Vulcans during 1969 as additional SSBNs were commissioned, to sustain 1 at sea at all times.
Declaration of Valiant to Saceur lapsed 26/1/65: he must address their 48 targets by juggling his nuclear assets...to which RAF would contribute, not to 1969 but to mid-1995. (FED #28: Harold Wilson did not "step out" of UK's NATO nuclear commitment: there was a brief hiccup, not of his volition).
CO29 #33: US Mutual Defense Program 1951-54 funded much that UK built in response to Korea (which we all saw as dress rehearsal for incursion into N.Germany 1956-ish). Hunter F.4/F.5 were deployed asap as better than Meteor F.8 (if not than loan Sabre F.4s), pending proper machines - Javelins, inc. Thin Wing variants later cancelled. No intent for lengthy operation. (Ditto with Sea Hawks, Javelin early Marks, and more besides: all intended as bridge to better kit).
In 1957 NATO agreed to part-fund an RAF Tactical (nuclear) Bomber Force, initially (2/7/59) Canberra B.6/US Mk.7, wef 1/1/60 Valiant/Mk.5. By Polaris Sales Agreement, 6/4/63, TBF was to be replaced by SSBNs assigned to NATO. On 23/5/63 the Medium Bomber Force in its entirety was assigned to Saceur. Plan on that day was to withdraw Valiants as No. 1 SSBN deployed in 1968, to withdraw the Blue Steel/Yellow Sun Mk.2 Vicor/Vulcans during 1969 as additional SSBNs were commissioned, to sustain 1 at sea at all times.
Declaration of Valiant to Saceur lapsed 26/1/65: he must address their 48 targets by juggling his nuclear assets...to which RAF would contribute, not to 1969 but to mid-1995. (FED #28: Harold Wilson did not "step out" of UK's NATO nuclear commitment: there was a brief hiccup, not of his volition).
CO29 #33: US Mutual Defense Program 1951-54 funded much that UK built in response to Korea (which we all saw as dress rehearsal for incursion into N.Germany 1956-ish). Hunter F.4/F.5 were deployed asap as better than Meteor F.8 (if not than loan Sabre F.4s), pending proper machines - Javelins, inc. Thin Wing variants later cancelled. No intent for lengthy operation. (Ditto with Sea Hawks, Javelin early Marks, and more besides: all intended as bridge to better kit).
Meteor - 1944-1977
Vampire - 1945-1972
Vampire - 1945-1972
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lancing, Sussex
Age: 92
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fatigue issues and age corrosion.
Our chief stressman had a sample of an alloy extrusion (I think DTD 683) which had never been be near an aicraft, but was covered in cracks.
Very glad it got nowhere near anything I flew.
Our chief stressman had a sample of an alloy extrusion (I think DTD 683) which had never been be near an aicraft, but was covered in cracks.
Very glad it got nowhere near anything I flew.