Thanks Coff, Mods?

In the meantime

http://m2.i.pbase.com/o9/17/747717/1....SS0002373.jpg

© airpicimages

with more images here Hawker Siddeley Nimrod MR1 & MR2 Photo Gallery by airpicimages at pbase.com

P.S. I'm not up on the regs of sharing photos from other peoples websites, if I am breaching any rules please let me know and I will just provide the links to the sites :O

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contri...Peter/6866.jpg

Another vote here for Maritime Monday

And, of course, there were 'other' Nimrods.....


I took that photo 'somewhere over Saudi' during Gulf War 1. We'd just refuelled him and as he broke away, I managed one quick shot across the flight deck with the trusty Canon T70 / Tokina 35-200 zoom!

(The black splodge at top left is the windscreen heating 'click stat' on the co-pilot's side window)

Ah BEagle, The love of my life (or just my life really) for 14 years. Almost knew every nut bolt and washer and lump and bump. My efforts during that period were quite rewarding.


I have the Keith Hill painting from 91 in my dining room but I don't think there are many pictures with the pods fitted.


One of my most memorable moments was taking off from Wyton and seeing the silhouette shadow having just broken through cloud similar to your picture. I mostly got a window seat!

Don't know what's wrong with you people. This is a mighty 'Unter. A little bit less so in this pic.

http://users.on.net/~alisoncc/hunter.jpg

Content removed

Many thanks to the Mod who kindly edited my original Thread Title to 'Maritime Monday' :ok:

As of next Monday ... let's see if we can get a few Logbook keepsake pics posted that haven't seen the light of day for some time ... I'm only too pleased to help with image posting if you're not familiar with the process ... just PM me ;)

Nice pic BEagle ... has anyone got an A2A pic of the 'Sidewinder' Nimrod ... (aka the largest fighter in the world) ?

Drag ... It's about time you started your own Thread covering all the aircraft mods you've been responsible for in your career :ok:

I was part of the trials team on the AEW 3, it did fly well, it was equipped with a pretty clever radar cooling system but that's where the good news comes to an end. The 'Grimrod' was never destined for greatness.
The radomes came in handy though, they were good shelters at Woodford golf course!

I did some work for the MR4 project and quietly asked what the engineering reasons for termination of the A/C.

I was told that one of the most insurmountable problems was that the airframes had all been built to DeHavillands / BAe drawings but, said drawings were used as a guideline rather than as rule during manufacture.

This led to each airframe being 'individual', almost bespoke and required that standard components were having to be tailored and modified to permit installation. (A case of having a jet-pipe manually adjusted with a hammer to enable its fitment and an issue of cabin floor beam location comes to mind).

Obviously, a costly and time consuming exercise in what should have been straightforward maintenance.

Lajes 1957
 

Monday morning blues?

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c3...onMk2Lajes.jpg

What advantage does the contra-rotating propellor arrangement on the Shackleton provide? I assume something specific to Maritime, the Gannet had it too, but the Shack's progenitors didn't have it.

Others will doubtless correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was something to do with coping with the power and torque of the Griffon engines without the unacceptable increase in propeller diameter that would otherwise have been needed.

Roadster - where to start?

The simple explanation is that the contra-rotating prop enables more thrust to be produced from the engine than a single prop (think six blades instead of three). To provide the same thrust from a single prop you would need four or five blades (at the time the limit of technology) with a much longer span, thus increasing engine spacing and undercarriage length. There was also no torque effect from each engine, although assymetric laws still applied However, that isn't the whole story as there were also significant weight and engineering penalties as well (of note the Gannet was not strictly speaking a c/r prop on one engine, but two engines with a prop for each!). I'm sure someone else will come onto the thread to explain this in much more detail.

Of more importance was the engines were actually tilted down slightly (I seem to remember the figure of 18 degrees, but that seems a lot) so as to alter the thrust line and hence improve low level performance and fuel usage. There was a lot of quite clever design work to optimise the aircraft for the maritime role, although it still bore much commonality with its Avro predecessors.

However, lets get back to the pictures!

Cheers guys. So not really a maritime thing then.

see how edumacational pprune is! I'd always thought the props contra-rotated so there was always one handy to pull on when stumbling past the StM gate-guard after a few...:p

Campaigners buy RAF St Mawgan Shackleton aircraft - BBC News

Now they have sold the Shac how is anyone going to know ex Kipper Fleet are on a SERE Cse?

Farewell to Coastal

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/a...IPCoastal2.jpg

aaah ... I wonder where the young lady is now ... she had what could only be described as the perfect rear, complete with nvpl ...;)

Roadster 280,


The Fairey Gannet had a Double Mamba turboprop driving the contra-rotating props. The gearbox arrangement allowed one engine to be shut down to save fuel and extend endurance without having an asymmetric effect. Engines would routinely be alternated on / off every 30 minutes to equalize usage. I always thought it was a nice little aircraft.


Fairey Gannet AEW3


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._AN1952247.jpg

Jetslut

[QUOTE]This led to each airframe being 'individual', almost bespoke and required that standard components were having to be tailored and modified to permit installation. (A case of having a jet-pipe manually adjusted with a hammer to enable its fitment and an issue of cabin floor beam location comes to mind).[QUOTE]

Another example, allegedly when the first MRA4 conversion was under way the new wing box did not quite match the fuselage. Measurements carried out across the fleet identified that the delta between the longest and shortest airframe was in the region of 18 inches! In those day aircraft were "coach built" by craftsmen forming pieces of metal, nowadays they are a kit of parts, and with modern manufacturing techniques every one of a particular part is exactly the same size!