No Water Please
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 46
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 905
Bit of an issue when operating from an airfield on an island?!
I guess the key word is ‘minimise’, so no long transits over water but the Menai Straits are probably not an obstacle. Which explains how the one that flew over me this morning made it to the Lake District.
Not sure if following the flow arrow up Windermere would count as minimizing though?
I guess the key word is ‘minimise’, so no long transits over water but the Menai Straits are probably not an obstacle. Which explains how the one that flew over me this morning made it to the Lake District.
Not sure if following the flow arrow up Windermere would count as minimizing though?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 11,305
Martin_the_Martian.
Take your choice, choke, freeze or drown.........
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...e-years-to-fix
So how exactly do the other ten air arms around the world that operate the T-6 manage?
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...e-years-to-fix
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,746
Two Newest RAF Pilots Earned their Wings in 'Record Time' | Aero-News Network
One way round it. FFS!
One way round it. FFS!
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 74
Posts: 3,434
Errr. One year JP to "wings", then (for the lucky ones) onto the Gnat, predecessor of the Hawk. I didn't go that route, but many did, and that was mid sixties. Re-inventing the wheel?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Next to Ross and Demelza
Age: 50
Posts: 1,134
Originally Posted by ORAC
Martin_the_Martian.
Take your choice, choke, freeze or drown.........
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...e-years-to-fix
Take your choice, choke, freeze or drown.........
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...e-years-to-fix
Hmm. Another great aircraft procurement decision. Is it too late to take them back and swap for some PC-21s?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,910
M the M
I have two points:
1. The MOD did not procure the aircraft. They were chosen and bought by the contractor. It is just possible that they may have realised they need more than the initial purchase of 10.
2. I’ve said this countless times before but I’ll say it again. PC21 is overkill. It’s a great aircraft but not what was required for the job in hand.
BV
1. The MOD did not procure the aircraft. They were chosen and bought by the contractor. It is just possible that they may have realised they need more than the initial purchase of 10.
2. I’ve said this countless times before but I’ll say it again. PC21 is overkill. It’s a great aircraft but not what was required for the job in hand.
BV
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Great South East, tired and retired
Posts: 3,278
the harness on this particular aircraft could not currently be fitted with a water-activated quick-release mechanism which would be required if a pilot became incapacitated in a sea survival situation.
But I think it is taking a rather extreme view in wanting this water-activated quick- release buckle. What happens when some student barfs on it? Or spills his inflight coffee?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,478
Originally Posted by Martin the Martian
Hmm. Another great aircraft procurement decision. Is it too late to take them back and swap for some PC-21s?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 692
Regarding PC-21, that aircraft is used by some air arms as an ab initio trainer and by some as an advanced trainer leading onto Gripen, F-18 etc. Therefore, it covers the whole spectrum of training. When the contractors (Affinity and Ascent) decided on platforms for MFTS the Hawk T2 was already well in service and the PC-21 would have had considerable overlap of capabilities with it. In fact, the PC-21 has some capabilities which I believe the Hawk T2 does not (synthetic air-to-ground radar). The PC-21 was more expensive than the T6 and so was not a sensible option, however good and capable it may have been.
I was involved with the proposal by Affinity to Ascent of the T6 as the platform for this role but my remit did not involve any aspects of AEA. Both the T6 and PC-21 are fitted with Martin-Baker Mk 16 ejection seats. Therefore, it begs the question why the UK T6s were not fitted with a version of the seat that used UK AEA. I suspect that it was a question of cost but some here may know more.
I was involved with the proposal by Affinity to Ascent of the T6 as the platform for this role but my remit did not involve any aspects of AEA. Both the T6 and PC-21 are fitted with Martin-Baker Mk 16 ejection seats. Therefore, it begs the question why the UK T6s were not fitted with a version of the seat that used UK AEA. I suspect that it was a question of cost but some here may know more.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,851
The Tucano was never cleared for flight over the sea due to a number of reasons.
The water-activated QRB sounds interesting. Something which doesn't operate when a student is strapping in on a wet day, but operates quickly enough to release him/her quickly enough to avoid drowning must be something of a design challenge.
But I still cannot understand why the RAF didn't include the optional the M-B Mk.17 lightweight ejection seat in the user requirement for the Prefect T1.
Last edited by BEagle; 12th Jul 2020 at 16:01. Reason: Syerston, not Sywell! Thanks for pointing out the fat finger error, Herod!
