COJONES NEEDED FOR CAS
 

Apparently the CAS refuses to sign off authorisation for the VC10 destined for Cosford to land at Cosford.

Two points:

How come it now takes high priced help to authorise what used to be done at squadron level?

Can anybody find a spare pair of cojones to replace the ones that the CAS has obviously misplaced?

In this crazy PC world the CAS will be authorising the "guest list" at dining-in nights.

The days when commanders had delegations are over methinks much to the demise of leadership qualities..

Was any reason given ?

COJONES NEEDED FOR CAS
 

All joking aside and I am not taking the proverbial but can you really land a VC10 at Cosford? It was bad enough landing a Jag there but I wouldn't fancy being onboard when someone tried it in an aircraft of that size.
Besides your average multi engine pilot doesn't land until he's wasted the first 2000'. That doesn't leave much runway at a place like that.
Despite the serious first question I couldn't resist the dig at the end. I'm sorry. I'll try harder to play nicer next time.
BV

A British Airways crew managed it quite easily when they took one of their VC10s there. That airframe was scrapped because it was taking up space and it was a civvy jet and there was no problem because Cosford would be getting one of the RAF ones once they became time-expired.

I guess that Wessex and Chinook pilots are excused élan, flair and a sense of adventure during training and any residual amounts are screened out once you are selected for higher things.

LMF at the top
 

BA landed a VC10 there some years ago. I understand the runway length is within the RAF VC10 capability.

Seems to me, that the RAF Hierarchy are covering their 6's a bit too much, typical of the worries of litigious society and micro management from above. This sort of decision wouldn't have got as far as the CAS in days gone by, it would have been dealt with at group level but maybe AOC group didn't wish to make the decision and passed it up the chain.

Its a shame that a stalwart of the RAF cannot be displayed at the RAF Museum because of someone who needs to grow a pair of Cojones.

A runway is a flat piece of tarmac 1186 metres long.

If the CAS has concerns, why doesn't he get the crew to
try landing it a couple of times where they are currently
within that distance to prove they can do it ?

Or are they only wanting to do one take off and landing ?

One landing only - it ain't going anywhere after that.

The trouble is it may already be too late. The airframe is probably at Bruntingthorpe now and being converted into razor blades.

Same thing happened with the R1 Grimrod a couple of years ago. It would have been no problem getting it in at Cosford but the powers that be decided it would have to go to Kemble, get taken to bits and then driven up to Cosford...

Maybe time for a new CAS.

The VC10 -XR808 or 'Bob' that was destined for Cosford, flies into Bruntingthorpe tomorrow (Monday 29 July).

I am afraid that this thread is too little, too late and given that the RAFM spent an awful lot of money bring ashore the DO17, it may be some time if at all that the Ten gets moved to Cosford.

I sincerely hope that the PSO is having a read of this so that first thing tomorrow he can knock on the door...

"ahem, boss, you probably need to have a look at a thread on PPRuNe. It's not good"

or maybe CAS himself is a secret lurker with a handle such as "SteelyChinookDriver" and contributes to threads about why knitting can be dangerous.

He's probably been reading the threads about airworthyness and realised that unless an independent MAA sign off on the airframe it's not going anywhere. Welcome to the future of the RAF.

And I'm not being snarky.

Alfred - as the first defender of CAS I hereby "out" you as the man himself :E

Well I remember them getting the Vulcan in there with no bother (apart from the fact they were alledegly told to "get a move on there's a train coming and we don't want you to hit it on the approach"

Mind you they ruined the show a bit by slipping off the taxiway.....

Of course I am, of course I am.

:ok:

I am so glad that the current managnent of the RAF were not in charge in 1940............... I would be writing this in German now if they had been.

Far too much CYA and not enough backbone to make a decision based on anything except zero risk to carreer.

There must be something pretty basic wrong for this to be elevated to CAS. Surely someone from Cosford could simply say what the given reason was?

He's also getting a pasting on the XR808 thread in the "Aviation History and nostalgia" section.

Has anyone bothered to show CAS the landing performance calculations?

Would he even understand them, given that the last aeroplane he flew was probably a Jet Provost 35 years ago?

Approach at VAT-5, land it on the right spot, full reverse and max braking, then shut down on the RW.

Not that much more difficult than landing on RW26 at St.Athan and stopping before the E turn off, which is about 1080m. Which even I could manage when delivering VC10K2s to Scrapheap Challenge.

When I was first at Brize 30 years ago, it was normal SOP to land with passengers in 1340m, to make the first turn off on RW26 - and that wasn't with particularly heavy braking.

I really hope that it isn't too late for this pretty simple task to be re-assessed...:sad:

The Germans are clearly made of stronger stuff than us - here is a clip of the last Interflug Illyushin 62 landing on 860m of grass:

The guys on 101 squadron did quite a lot of practice landings at Brize for it, but it (apparently) only made it with 300 ft spare, so decided to chin it off!

Perhaps, given CAS's background, the way forward is a Wokka on each corner, as an underslung load:D

ATG:_
If there were one message from the threads that you mention, it would be that the CAS, and the rest of the RAF High Command for that matter, do indeed need the appendages mentioned by the OP. Nothing in that campaign would stand in the way of a straight forward matter of airmanship such as this is, or even a full blown operational sortie against a determined and well equipped enemy. All this matter needs is leadership. All the scandal of UK Military Airworthiness needs is leadership. We are I'm afraid, in violent agreement!

Sisemen, what was the reason for refusing, do you know?

No idea. I picked the story up from the history & nostalgia thread and thought it deserved a look by the people that matter in the hopes that either the decision can be changed in time or that CAS is embarrassed enough to put his knitting away and show some proper leadership.

One perhaps should ask how this decision reached CAS (if it even has)? I'd imagine that everyone from Sqn Cdr, Stn Cdr, Force Cdr and AOC Gp has probably wrung their hands of it - leaving CAS as the 'last resort'. Put yourself in his shoes; if the Truckie 'expert' DH chain has refused to authorise it why should a non-expert SH pilot agree to it? The DH chain is built upon using SQEP in key positions - if they've said 'too much risk' then why should he overrule his 'experts'?

I had assumed that CAS had made the decision wearing his other hat as CinC Air Command (despite there being a 2* AOC 2 Gp and a 3* D Com Ops below him in the chain of command). However it seems that on Air Safety matters there is a completely separate chain, which runs from Stn Cdr (as Delivery Duty Holder:rolleyes:) to the Operational Duty Holder (who dat?) and then directly to CAS as 'Senior Duty Holder'!!! The mind boggles. :ugh:

You win today's wanque-word prize!

CAS - JFDI!!!

Why not wait until > 20 kts of wind from the right direction is forecast? That would surely reduce the risk.

However, I also was a helicopter pilot and haven't flown an aeroplane since the JP - other than a Chipmunk!

I love the comments on here. 500N, why doesn't he have them practice!! Do you seriously think that he wouldn't have thought of that??!!
Jeez

I'm amazed that the niaivety on PPRuNe!! It's great. Like the most senior RAF officer wouldn't have thought if all that's been written on here.
Haha!!

Well, there you go. Its not just me thinking it, that the paucity of true leadership in public service has reached the highest echelons of the military... its not just the police, the politicos or the NHS, its across the board.

The rot started during Options For Change and has only got worse since.

I dont suppose these guys are all Common Purpose Graduates as well are they? :E

betty

All the discussion up to that point was on the concern the runway
was too short.

If that was his concern, my comment was not to practice
but to show it could be done.

I watched 10s land at Belize, and turn off at the mid-point access to the parking area. What was that - about 3000'??

I know they had pax and freight onboard - I assume they also had diversion fuel to get them to the Land Of Better Hotels And Much Better Rates.

So I assume they were not at minimum weight.

As mentioned previously, a bit of wind down the strip, and light weight...........

Shame.

It is a lovely aircraft, and has served the RAF well.

It does deserve its place in the RAF Museum.

I would put money on 808 being kept at Bruntingthorpe and used as a fast taxi down the runway aircraft on the open days and also used for corporate events as was 471. PM me for details of VC10 limited edition Malt Whisky, still some left!!

It worse than that Betty, you got punters on here castigating a dude for making a decision without any knowledge of what decision he made, whether he made it or why!:D:D:D Truly laughable - but hey it is a rumour network.

As for CAS making a policy decision on the basis of reading PPrune - that's the same foolishness that expects the Daily Mail to write a technically correct air incident report - please :}


Look there's a witch.

A VC10 did a low approach and overshoot at Cosford a couple of weeks ago.

I guess the crew report would have been part of the decision-making process. :(

And CAS only took over on Wednesday! Give him a break. And whilst the decision went to him, (CYA by those below), I bet it was a rock solid "Ooh no sir, unless you say so", from about Group Captain upwards.

And as the Pres of the B of I for the Mull Chinook - when he was a wg cdr - I guess he has his own views on Airworthiness and Senior Officers. :ok:

I think he's a good bloke.

After 3 days?

Blimey, some people have no patience!! :ugh:

No,,,, so contrary to the bollocks written on here by some, he actually came to the decision informed with information from SMEs (one for Beagle to crow about) and using his own good judgement - heaven forfend! Wonder if that's why he got to be CAS.:D

If it only had 300ft to spare, then imagine the consequences of a failure of a thrust reverser, spoilers or brakes. In a VC-10 that old the risk also has to be weighed for the crew.

I would suggest the new CAS has far bigger cojones than many of the posters here. Any of the naysayers ever flown with/for him on SH?