RAF to retire Tucano
Inverted spin in Scotland - 2 pob, double ejection
Prop fatigue fail near Driffield - 2 pob, double ejection
Not understanding gate heights - 1 pob, single ejection.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a photograph published in the Support Command flight safety magazine that showed three senior officers in No 1’s stood on the wing of a Tucano peering into the front cockpit. I can”t remember whether it was intended to be a caption competition, but the line scrawled in the magazine in our crewroom was:
“Roy Turgoose (D CFI) says four people can stand on the wing of a JP”
“Roy Turgoose (D CFI) says four people can stand on the wing of a JP”
What are the relative accident rates for RAF training aircraft post WW2? A lot of complaints on here but no-one was ever killed in a Tucano as far as I can see..............
Mil 26
I don’t think it’s the role that is the issue here. It is the relative performance difference between the Prefect and it’s predecessors.
Having said that, I wouldn’t fancy manually bailing out of anything.
BV
Having said that, I wouldn’t fancy manually bailing out of anything.
BV
Thread Starter
Me neither, BV !
There was no ejection seat option for the Bulldog; however, the Grob 120TP is available with M-B's Mk17 seats as an option:
Mk17 Ejection Seat - Martin-Baker
But not an option which MFTS chose for RAF Prefect pilots....
Why ever not?
There was no ejection seat option for the Bulldog; however, the Grob 120TP is available with M-B's Mk17 seats as an option:
Mk17 Ejection Seat - Martin-Baker
But not an option which MFTS chose for RAF Prefect pilots....
Why ever not?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,742
Received 2,727 Likes
on
1,160 Posts
Here you go, splash the cash and you to could own one, with a better cockpit fit I might add
https://www.platinumfighters.com/tucanozf200
https://www.platinumfighters.com/tucanozf266
Or if your REALLY feeling the need for Speed
https://www.platinumfighters.com/phantom2
https://www.platinumfighters.com/tucanozf200
https://www.platinumfighters.com/tucanozf266
Or if your REALLY feeling the need for Speed
https://www.platinumfighters.com/phantom2
A lot of complaints on here but no-one was ever killed in a Tucano as far as I can see..............
Thread Starter
The Shorts Chief Test Pilot went to do trials in FEBRUARY over the sea near Rathlin Island (think Atlantic/Irish Sea) whilst wearing trainers and no immersion suit. The aim of the trials was to increase the permitted max speed from 270kt to 300kt whilst carrying underwing stores (only fitted to export Tucanos, not RAF ones). Essentially, the heavy stores damped oscillations in the wings and this energy had to go somewhere so it vibrated the tail which fell off at about 293kt (IIRC). Shorts had failed to spot from the recorded figures that this point had been nearly reached on the previous flight. Due to changing the PSP just before take-off, the pilot had then failed to re-attach his leg restraints, so when he ejected after the tail failed, his legs were up under the panel due to negative G. With these injuries and the cold he failed to get free of his parachute and get into his dinghy, and was found dead a short while later.
A feature of the Embraer design (not changed by Shorts) was the quite narrow rear fuselage. Although the tailplane had provision for mass balance weights in the elevator horns, these were empty and the mass balance was an awful arrangement inside the fin. My belief was that Embraer had probably found oscillation in original trials and so had moved the mass balance weights inboard to ease the problem. Hence the deficiency in the tail was probably known.
Thanks possel - that sounds bloody awful TBH
I suppose one thing we CAN be sure of is that PPrune 2039 will be full of people saying what a bloody marvelous aeroplane the Tucano was and how (insert whatever they buy going forwards) is rubbish
I suppose one thing we CAN be sure of is that PPrune 2039 will be full of people saying what a bloody marvelous aeroplane the Tucano was and how (insert whatever they buy going forwards) is rubbish
Dead right about the Phantom. I recall spending many days at Gan with a couple of riggers fettling a new canopy to fit after a certain OC 41 lost his original canopy on climb out heading for Tengah to do the recce pod hot/humid trials. Got through an awful lot of files and spent more evenings than we cared for in the Blue Lagoon.
Some interesting points raised here. A few thoughts from me ...
When I went through training on the JP, the Group 1/Phase 1 course was 60 hours for those going to the Gnat or Hunter and included 300 kt navexes. When the Hawk came in, the Valley course on it was 15 hours longer than for the Gnat or Hunter (due to the greater endurance) so the Group 1/Phase 1 course was reduced to 45 hours and the 300 kt navexes were taken out of the syllabus. However, the initial couple of navexes on the Hawk were then flown at 300 kts before moving on to 360 and 420 kts.
The reason why inverted spinning was cleared in the Release to Service was because if the Tucano did spin inadvertently during aerobatics (and it was not prone to do so) then it was considered to be about a 40% probability that it would be an inverted spin. During the R to S trials, the first inverted spin entered was actually by a navigator in the rear seat on a CT sortie when he attempted to fly a half Cuban 8! We then did the trial. It has to be said that this was the first RAF aircraft to be cleared for inverted spinning for a very long time. Anyone know what the previous one was - I think that it may have been the Vampire T11? On the spin trial we limited the number of spins flown per sortie to 25 for pilot fatigue reasons. The control forces in some modes tested were very high, especially full power erect spins to the left when the push force to centralise the stick after 4 turns was about 100 lbs. We flew 6 turn inverted spins as well within the 30 seconds available. It was fantastic fun on that trial! However, the Tucano did also acquire the nickname 'Shorts' Multi-Gym'.
We cleared it to fly in winds up to 40 kts and crosswinds of up to 30 kts. In fact, the highest crosswind during a landing on the trial was 42 kts; it was solid as a rock and would always have been my preferred aircraft in a strong crosswind.
The fatal accident was caused by the tail separating because the flutter analysis with the wing stores had only been done for the wings and the effect of the increased mass on the fuselage aft of the trailing and the tail had not been considered nor analysed; the relative frequencies of the flutter modes on these two parts of the airframe had changed dramatically.
Many of today's fast jet pilots have trained on the Tucano and learnt great flying skills. Therefore, it worked! As for the politics, when the competition for selection was still taking place, Margaret Thatcher visited a Farnborough Air Show and she was shown around the Shorts stand. When briefed on the Tucano she (allegedly) said "Ah yes, the aeroplane that is going to create jobs in Northern Island"!
I did not train on it, I did not instruct on it at BFTS but I have very fond memories of some fascinating flying in it over 30 years.
When I went through training on the JP, the Group 1/Phase 1 course was 60 hours for those going to the Gnat or Hunter and included 300 kt navexes. When the Hawk came in, the Valley course on it was 15 hours longer than for the Gnat or Hunter (due to the greater endurance) so the Group 1/Phase 1 course was reduced to 45 hours and the 300 kt navexes were taken out of the syllabus. However, the initial couple of navexes on the Hawk were then flown at 300 kts before moving on to 360 and 420 kts.
The reason why inverted spinning was cleared in the Release to Service was because if the Tucano did spin inadvertently during aerobatics (and it was not prone to do so) then it was considered to be about a 40% probability that it would be an inverted spin. During the R to S trials, the first inverted spin entered was actually by a navigator in the rear seat on a CT sortie when he attempted to fly a half Cuban 8! We then did the trial. It has to be said that this was the first RAF aircraft to be cleared for inverted spinning for a very long time. Anyone know what the previous one was - I think that it may have been the Vampire T11? On the spin trial we limited the number of spins flown per sortie to 25 for pilot fatigue reasons. The control forces in some modes tested were very high, especially full power erect spins to the left when the push force to centralise the stick after 4 turns was about 100 lbs. We flew 6 turn inverted spins as well within the 30 seconds available. It was fantastic fun on that trial! However, the Tucano did also acquire the nickname 'Shorts' Multi-Gym'.
We cleared it to fly in winds up to 40 kts and crosswinds of up to 30 kts. In fact, the highest crosswind during a landing on the trial was 42 kts; it was solid as a rock and would always have been my preferred aircraft in a strong crosswind.
The fatal accident was caused by the tail separating because the flutter analysis with the wing stores had only been done for the wings and the effect of the increased mass on the fuselage aft of the trailing and the tail had not been considered nor analysed; the relative frequencies of the flutter modes on these two parts of the airframe had changed dramatically.
Many of today's fast jet pilots have trained on the Tucano and learnt great flying skills. Therefore, it worked! As for the politics, when the competition for selection was still taking place, Margaret Thatcher visited a Farnborough Air Show and she was shown around the Shorts stand. When briefed on the Tucano she (allegedly) said "Ah yes, the aeroplane that is going to create jobs in Northern Island"!
I did not train on it, I did not instruct on it at BFTS but I have very fond memories of some fascinating flying in it over 30 years.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 412 Likes
on
217 Posts
It has to be said that this was the first RAF aircraft to be cleared for inverted spinning for a very long time. Anyone know what the previous one was - I think that it may have been the Vampire T11?
