You 'aint seen me gov
 

Lightning Mates rather coy admission on another current thread that he was once on Jags (I'd never have guessed sweetie :ooh:) got me into thinking what military aircraft types would aircrew really be embarrassed to be on because of the banter from aircrew on other types. Clearly the past Jag and Gazelle fraternity still suffer a fair degree of stick for their 'sins' but what current/past types would you really not want to be on?

Cheers

Tornado F3 - a great disappointment after flying the F4

Anything with more aircrew than engines!

Except, that is, for the fine products of Airbus Military!

Or that POS and all-round aeronautical abortion, the Jetstream T Mk 1 !

Anything which is not single seat and doesn't have a trigger.:E

Anything where the drivers had bang seats and the workers didn't!

I heard that flying a Jaguar was a bit like having a w**k: it was all right when you were doing it, but if your mum found out it would be very embarrassing.:O

Starts with 'GA', ends in 'WACS'
Surely this wins hands down

LM - your perfect steed awaits :ok:

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/ima...unicorn3,j.jpg

Wensleydale
 

Just showed 'Shewhomustbeobeyed' and jointly responsible for off-spring Jag pilot your post - she nearly dropped her beer laughing!

Anything with 8 screws.

The Mark 1 then the Mark 2 is in service.

AEW3.

I thought that 8 screws were better than 4 blowjobs? :O

Jags eh, funny thing though, was the first sqn from uk in theatre when GW1 kicked off,. and yes I know tonnka's were there before us....... but there were in cyprus all ready........

12 Jags , ground crew , a R.I.C. , RAF field catering , all sorted in two days flat , once the air bribge got going.

could the tonnka have done the same in that time ???

What's wrong with the mighty Gazelle?!!

The aviation equivalent to an old Lotus Elan. Even painted racing green.
Perfect.

I saw those jags take off from Akro enroute to GW1 - it was scary. Air getting hotter as each one went and the last one got off about a gnat's cock from the end. Genuine curvature of the Earth stuff.

Should also mention that our UK F3 Sqn was in Akro before the jags, holding Q and could have been in sandland if needed. So there, ner!

I would have been desperately embarrassed to tow targets for a living:O, so the Canberra gets my vote.

It was two, anyway we had to do something to overcome our inferiority complex. Fly for hours, get no where. Crap radar, only good thing was the galley, the downside was the two main spars when carrying a tray of tea.

We used to have 5 gallon jerry cans of water and a hand pump to fill the kettle because the water tanks were supposedly contaminated - had been for years.

IIRC, only when we asked the question did they fix the tanks.

Despite the fact that they were brightest puce, at 19 I reckoned that being in sole charge of a whistling chicken leg from Culdrose to Predannack and back to CU was pretty good. Getting paid to do it - just amazing :}

Anything where the captain was a pompous t*at.

Anything requiring the crew to wet their pants rather than saunter back to the latrine.

Anything without the legs to fly to the USA in one hop.

Anything painted white.

Anything flown in blues.

BGG,

I presume that the last 2 digits of your total number of posts are a happy coincidence ;)

BGG

It possibly went to a commandeered Shorts Belfast out of Stanstead to Batin in Abu Dhabi around the end of August '90 ;)

Given the arbitrary Squadron number 69 as the loadies thought there was something fishy about it ...............

It was indeed two, not four


http://i587.photobucket.com/albums/s...g?t=1305278079

XA

"no they weren't, that distinction went to a large 4 engined aircraft from Wyton (at the time)''

Not forgetting the four engined aircraft that were there to refuel them!

8 srews vs 4 engines best state dates, 6 sqn Jag were in the middle east 12th Aug 89 !!!

MRA4

:{

Duncs:ok:

Mr F3WMB?

You point the finger of scorn at the Canberra for target towing. But you forget that was one use of some aircraft for a period of its overall life. The final Canberras in service were the mighty PR9s which continued their quality recce function on ops until about 5 years ago.

And it had a fair performance - London Mil to to Marham callsign in the climb for the Westcott corridor "Can you make FL235 in the next 10 miles or will you take an orbit?" Response from PR9 "my dear we're not a Tornado..."

Embarrassed? Not a word of it. I was proud to have done my stint in my cupboard as a PR9 front seater.

:)

BigV

Canberra is still in service, in one guise or another...

General Dynamics WB-57 "Canberra" 63-13298 - N928NA "NASA 928" | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

wonderful beast, Canberra with 2 U-2 engines.

Re Canberra roles.
Well aware of the many faces of the Canberra; recce is respectable and low level strike in Germany would have been a fine role, but I was too young for that... No offence intended for those who flew it other than for target tow.
Glad I flew something where, when Manchester Control wants to know your climb heading to FL330 out of Warton, you can request "vertical".

JP 3 :{

I didn't mind the JP 5, what with its electric canopy an' all but the 3 was a piece of crap that I thoroughly disliked and was embarrassed to be seen in. It didn't help being on Linton's 2 Sqn at the time with a knob of a Boss, sharing equal knobottity with my Flt Commander. Fortunately the Senior Service 'jumped' ahead so 3 Sqn and the JP 5 managed to drastically reduce the embarrassment factor :)

A window-licking Bagger!:E

any aircraft where flying that does not count towards an ATPL.

any aircraft in which you can't have a cup of tea.

any aircraft that needs a gpu

any aircraft that cannot go vertical

Hear hear............:D

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/u...oopgoingup.jpg

Does this one count LM??

http://www.rotorleasing.com/images/vertical_gazelle.jpg

... and unless the cloud horizon is most unusual, your Frightnin' ain't vertical! :ok:

Sure does count mate. :ok:

The Frightning was doing a lazy loop at the time, and the mate taking the pic from the two-seater was just a tad too late.

Still, a loop occupying 25,000 ft still says performance, whichever way you look at it.

Got a mate here at work who flew Gazelles - he liked it.:)

LM

Got a photograph on my wall here that shows a Shawbury Gazelle in a similar attitude but at 30ft AGL.

Lightnings have achieved similar attitudes at that level, as proved by the famous photo of George Aird and the Fordson Major driver.

Difference is the Gazelle could do it more than once. :E

Fascinating - do tell us more. :uhoh:

Edit:

Don't bother - stood next to me is a man with 5000 hours on Gazelles who is #####ng himself with laughter!

So how come it went up as a Lightning and down as a Gazelle. Some conjuring trick!

LM

I will get a copy of the aforesaid photograph from the original photographer Ian Forshaw and post it on here with his permission.

There is, I admit, an element of camera trickery involved which makes the aircraft seem in a vertical attitude but in reality is not more than 45 degrees. Your tame Gazelle jockey can probably make a judgment as to what angle can be achieved from a backward transition recovery.

Dak

Thank you.

This guy ain't a tame Gazelle pilot mate - he's ex-army and finished on the Apache.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=858_1202863592
Ignore the Puma stuff, but this is proper whistling chicken leg low level, not that nancy boy fixed wing "low" plus a bit of vertical thrown in.

Camera trickery isn't always necessary (but it would be for a 30 foot agl one). From a rearwards (negative airspeed) full power climb, a Puma will easily go to at least 130 degrees nose down, the Gazelle can probably do more, but the next few seconds from 400ft agl are a bit interesting in the Puma.

The Puma will also do a 270 degree roll while vertically nose down from 400ft agl and zero airspeed. The Gazelle will do a full 360 roll from about the same height because it doesn't have a restricted lateral cyclic travel. However, if you get it wrong in a Puma the tail rotor can do something it really shouldn't and get seriously damaged (I believe later displays were toned down quite a bit).

P.s. btw, 90 degrees nose up isn't really too difficult in many helicopters. But please don't try this at home. :cool: