Air squadron Bulldogs - a question about speed!
 

I spent several happy years learning to the Dog with NUAS from 89-91 and then again when they turned up at civilian flying schools and one thing has always intrigued me.

If I remember flat out was 140kts IAS, nav was flown at 25/25 120kts IAS indicated, 12 gals per hour. None of the civilian versions I have flown get anywhere near this - more like 125kts and 110-115kts at 25/25.

I so my question is this, is my memory wrong or did the Air Squadron versions put out significantly more than 200HP?

thanks!

I flew with UWAS in the seventies and in HongKong in the eighties. The same basic aircraft but different performance due to temperature, humidity, etc.
The annual airtests never came up to the book figures but a superb aircraft
for training. We replaced them with Slingsby Fireflies which were not as rugged but nicer looking.
At UWAS I remember my student putting 6 G's on the meter during a PFL and my boss (Adam Wise) giving me a quick reprimand so that he could tell the AOC that the matter had been dealt with on the squadron. Never heard anymore about it!

120 knots is right as I recall.

Power settings are something I don't recall as I was usually the kiddy learning to map read.

this site:

Bulldog aircraft specifications and performance

gives cruise speed at 75% power as 130 knots and econo as 118 knots at 60% power.

Up the Free Northumbrian Air Force, Howay the Lads :ok:

Your memory is correct

This thread should sort it out if the study guides are still up.

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...udy-guide.html

I remember one student bending the engine mounts one by pulling 6.5g out of a wing over. but great learning plane and still the easiest to handle in a stiff cross wind.

I also seem to remember our boss Mike Baker air raced and his was tweaked a bit to about 143kt ias.

I also think 100kts was 19" / 2400. but certainly the figures from Pilot friend don't seem right for either military or civi versions.

RHKAAF - Adam Wise - same Towers Entry - sadly now departed for the crew room in the sky. finished up as an equerry in Buck House, I think to either Prince Andrew or Prince Edward. Certainly in the procession in one of the Royal weddings late 80s. Nice guy, good company

Camargue: What civvy variant are you flying? If you are flying the Series 100, Model 101, as flown by Ultimate High, they have a pitot head in the wing leading edge and not on the underwing mast like the ex-RAF aircraft (Model 121). Because of position error the indicated speeds are therefore different. For example:

VNE: Model 101 = 169 kt. Model 121 = 185 kt.

VNO: Model 101 = 126 kt. Model 121 = 135 kt.

Note: Model 101 speeds converted from km/hr as quoted in the Flight Manual.

There were a couple at Old Sarum a while back, one was G-BULL, ex HK and looking at some photo's I found just now pitot is def under wing.

Having said this positioning would explain some of it but looking at the cadet notes put up by dave sawdon (used to own g-bull) some years back they state for example that nav was flown full throttle but the pilots notes I made whilst at nuas say nav 25/2500, 120kts and I am certain 2600 was only ever set for aeros'/stalling/spinning etc and not for cruise.

WanderOO Adam Wise was equerry to HM The Queen.

RHKAAF you well Ceri?

LA - I think he was firstly an Equerry to HM the Queen, then Private Secretary and Equerry to Prince Andrew and Prince Edward from 1983 to 1987. He was an ADC to HM the Queen when Station Commander at RAF Benson (and Deputy Captain of the Queen's Flight).

Bulldog IAS and Adam wise
 

I fly Bulldog XX553 in "hot and high" southern CA. It's good for about 110-112kts IAS straight-and-level at 4,000ft AMSL with everything forward bar the RPM at 2,600 ... BUT the engine needs an overhaul as it's 2,000 hours since the RAF last opened it up.


I fly Bulldog G-DISA when I'm in the UK (ex-RJAF). It's good for 120+kts IAS straight-and-level at 3,000ft AMSL, again with everything forward and RPM 2,600. Hope this helps.


Regarding Adam Wise, he was our OC at ULAS between 1984 and 1986 and was, at least initially, Royal Equerry to Princes Andrew and Edward. Prince Edward flew with ULAS during Easter Camp at RAF Abingdon in 1984 or 1985 IIRC.


Regards all,


ABL262

If RHKAAF is who I think he is, he sent me on my first Bulldog solo on 21st July 1980. Adam Wise sent me on my second solo the following day after saying "I'm not sitting here any longer while you try to kill me. I've just about saved up enough to buy a replacement one of these so you can carry on on your own."

Your nos seem to be in line with the what Dog does today but is at a variance with what I remember from UAS days - I am just curious as to why this might be and if there are any ex UAS qfi/cfi 's who could comment!

Well, if its not position error then all it can be is clapped out engines and propellers.

Engine data here

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/cb8eb266e5683e5b86257a09004d8f38/$FILE/1E10%20Rev%2024.pdf

Yes you are correct ABL262. It was Easter 84. PL came back as one of Prince Edward's instructors and conducted my BHT, curiously enough in XX553.

Bulldog IAS
 

I think Mandator has hit the nail on the head.


Original RAF Bulldog engine pool must be getting awfully long-in-the-tooth. ISTR the engine in XX553 has more cumulative hours since factory new than the airframe itself with multiple overhauls during its 40+ year life. So, despite regular service, the engines must be getting a little "wheezy" by now. On the other hand, props should be fine as they were all replaced following a Hartzell AD in the late 90s.


I know a couple of Bulldogs have had more recent vintage engines fitted - Bulldog XX554 and one of the Ultimate Highs. Perhaps Cim Jartner and Greeners, respectively, could provide a before-and-after comparison before we all rush down to the Lycoming factory sale in pursuit of an extra 10kts.

ABL262: If you could talk to the (now defunct) CAA Flight Department, which used to monitor fleet climb performance based on CofA renewal flight test data, they would have shown you a graph of a steady decline in performance over the past ten years. In RAF days there was no hesitation to change engines, either for defect or immediately on life expiry. In civvy street, engines flog on and on, way over the Lyco TBO (unless operated commercially). A further risk to civvy engines is that many of them have very low utilisation compared to the Dog's time in the military, resulting in heavy internal corrosion and excessive wear, especially of the camshaft. This has a marked effect on the power developed by the engine.

However, people often forget the importance the propeller, not only making sure it is correctly adjusted, but also the effect of years of blending and cropping at the tips due to stone damage operating off grass strips and crumbling WW2 runways. A new Hartzell prop tip is something of a 'paddle blade' and it does a lot of work soaking up the engine's power. Crop or blend that tip (even within R&O limits) and there can be a significant loss of performance.

A blended prop even within R&O limits, which are usually based on sustaining structural integrity of the prop, on a clapped engine may therefore not develop enough grunt for the aircraft to meet its book figures. Already several Bulldogs are carrying performance write-downs in their Flight Manuals because they can't get within the 70 ft/min drop off on the book climb figures allowed by the CAA.

From what everyone here is saying is that the Bulldogs used to whizz along in military service, so the performance drop-off must be a civvy thing. Chaps, look to your engines and propellers.

Airframe too has an effect on performance - every imperfection in the paint, every slight ding in the leading edge or anywhere else all has a cumulative effect.
Lots of these aircraft live outside now rather than cosseted in a hangar and cleaned regularly - a good polish will restore 5kts.


7700