Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Tornado GR4 last flight

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.

Tornado GR4 last flight

Old 25th Jan 2019, 10:45
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 99
Originally Posted by drustsonoferp View Post


A 16-ship, or 4 x 4-ships?
At least they did it in style not badges.

Point of order though. When did aircrew start creasing their flying coveralls.
weemonkey is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 12:05
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: One Three Seven, Disco Heaven.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,202
Originally Posted by BEagle View Post
That retro paint job looks superb!

I remember in 1979 or 1980 when the first 'wraparound' painted Vulcan arrived at Scampton for six-seventeen squadron - it too looked very smart.

In 1982 there was actually a study to investigate whether the Tornado could be used in the South Atlantic War. Although Tornado documentation was rather secret squirrel, when an ODM was finally made available the planners dissolved into fits of giggles when they started some calculations....

Not a strategic asset, but excellent work in GW1.

They got 2 Buccs down there in 1983, so surely the Tornado could have made it?
Dan Gerous is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 12:09
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 99
Originally Posted by Dan Gerous View Post
They got 2 Buccs down there in 1983, so surely the Tornado could have made it?
I'm sure the F3 was there when the F4 did their farewell beat ups...
weemonkey is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 12:11
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,485
They got 2 Buccs down there in 1983, so surely the Tornado could have made it?
in 82 you'd have to get them back too.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 13:21
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 294
Bit of a difference between a one way ferry trip covered in external fuel tanks and a two way war mission carrying weapons.
Timelord is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 13:35
  #86 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 313
I'm sure they would have been capable of tanking there and back from Ascension but based on my GW1 experience, I'm certain they would have run out of engine oil.
Vendee is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 14:55
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Posts: 212
Originally Posted by Vendee View Post
I'm sure they would have been capable of tanking there and back from Ascension but based on my GW1 experience, I'm certain they would have run out of engine oil.
That was the biggest risk at that time.
The early Mk101 engines had a pretty inefficient Breather system that allowed a fair amount of oil to be discharged overboard from the external gearbox.

This resulted in relatively high oil consumption (HOC).
The spec was 0,5l/hr which most engines achieved but the trend increased with age.
High speed low level also increased oil consumption.
The usable oil was about 8.5l and hence engines using more than the limit could have been oil limited.
This was resolved by improving the engine internal oil system and gearbox breather system as well as increasing the usable oil content.
Buster15 is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 16:38
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 64
Originally Posted by Vendee View Post
I quite like the centre badge. Squadron Prints don't seem to have them on their website yet.
They were released Wednesday evening and the stock set aside for the online shop, sold out in hours.
Whatever they didn't sell at the Marham Enthusiast's Day today should be listed later, I would have thought.

I bought the set.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 17:12
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 64
One of the first images from Wednesday's shoot.

The photoship was ZA449/020.

BVRAAM is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 19:37
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dreamland
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by weemonkey View Post
At least they did it in style not badges.
Rather more difficult to put on air displays when the force is still successfully achieving ongoing ops,
Harley Quinn is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 21:41
  #91 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by Buster15 View Post
That was the biggest risk at that time.
The early Mk101 engines had a pretty inefficient Breather system that allowed a fair amount of oil to be discharged overboard from the external gearbox.

This resulted in relatively high oil consumption (HOC).
The spec was 0,5l/hr which most engines achieved but the trend increased with age.
High speed low level also increased oil consumption.
The usable oil was about 8.5l and hence engines using more than the limit could have been oil limited.
This was resolved by improving the engine internal oil system and gearbox breather system as well as increasing the usable oil content.
Even the Mk103 had issues with oil consumption and all the GW1 engines had their breather carbon seals replaced. ISTR the Mk103's had better cooling for the module 11 bearing overheat issues and of course the all attitude oil tank rather than the clunky SLS feature of the Mk101.
Vendee is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 22:16
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 1,526
A thought regarding TTTE.
The Cottesmore S Met O, Pat Stevens, was a very innovative and proactive scientist and pioneered very early use of computer displays to disseminate Met. around the base. This was in spite of official [Met Office] lack of enthusiasm. TTTE were well served by his office. Thank you Pat!
langleybaston is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2019, 22:58
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Narfalk
Posts: 9
As an Air Cadet , I saw the Vailant ta Marham (and sat in it). There was a Tornado in one of the Hangars as well. It was 1981. As others have said, it was in service with the RAF then.
Cat Techie is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2019, 01:16
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 810
The F3 had bigger oil tanks than the GR - I’ve done more than 10 hrs in a Tonka without running out of oil in accordance with the RTS.
The B Word is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2019, 10:09
  #95 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by The B Word View Post
The F3 had bigger oil tanks than the GR - Iíve done more than 10 hrs in a Tonka without running out of oil in accordance with the RTS.
As far as I'm aware, the Mk104 engine in the F3 had the same oil tank as the Mk103 engine in the later GR1 and current GR4. However at the time of the Falklands conflict, the only Tornado engine in town was the Mk101 which as previously stated had higher oil consumption.

The Mk103 engine was initially fitted to the Germany based squadrons. I don't know when the Mk101 was finally retired but we were certainly still using them at Honington in 1989. I would imagine that TTTE were the last unit to use them.
Vendee is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2019, 15:38
  #96 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 313
Looks like there will be a flypast tour

From the BBC website. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-47013735

"The jet's capabilities will be transferred to the Typhoon and there is set to be a "finale flypast" around the UK to commemorate places that have contributed to the Tornado over the years, according to Station Commander Group Captain Ian Townsend."

It also mentions a flypast at Marham on 14th March for the disbandment parades.
Vendee is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2019, 16:35
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Posts: 212
Originally Posted by The B Word View Post
The F3 had bigger oil tanks than the GR - Iíve done more than 10 hrs in a Tonka without running out of oil in accordance with the RTS.
Not correct I am sorry. The F3 Mk104 engine was functionality the same as the Mk103 engine in the GR4.
The only difference was the longer 104 Exhaust System and the DECU.

The capability for significantly longer flights was the result of improvements to the oil system that reduced oil consumption.
Buster15 is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2019, 18:18
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Uranus
Posts: 810
^^^^I need to sack the ground school instructor then!!
The B Word is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2019, 18:50
  #99 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by The B Word View Post
^^^^I need to sack the ground school instructor then!!
Not really. He probably meant that the F3 had a larger oil capacity than the GR1 with its original Mk 101 engines and he would have been correct in that respect.
Vendee is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2019, 20:18
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lincoln
Age: 66
Posts: 449
Vaguely remember two RAF Coningsby, 229 OCU F2 aircraft, doing an oil usage trial by flying non-stop to Cyprus, cleaning the cockpit out on return took a little while longer than usual, and there was something on the outbound trip about the rumoured use of HF and a possible UFCM, but age and memory maybe has affected my recollections. I believe oil consumption was not considered an issue after this. Maybe someone remembers some more detail and can confirm, or refute, those recollections.

Also from my perspective from working on virtually all marks of Tornado, I will miss the sight and sounds of them flying around, hope I see some of the flypasts around my way.
Exrigger is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.