But if someone wanted to you could apply some pretty big decals to the bottom (see the display scheme a while back). And you definitely can put a dark scheme on a Tutor...

http://www.airnieuws.com/movements/s...16-09-2012.jpg

Makes you wonder why we haven't done the same to our "stealth" Tutors?

What's up with the ejection seat warning stickers on the Texan - they're nearly bigger than the RAF roundels!! :yuk::yuk:

http://aerossurance.com/wp-content/u...ts-texan-1.jpg

What an ugly looking thing that T-6C is.....

What with that, the Grob Prefect and the Phenom, Arse-scent seem to have captured the market for ugly looking aeroplanes.

As they will be operating out of Valley perhaps they've had to make them bigger to allow the Welsh translation to be printed on them? Just like the road signs and police cars.:E

And yes, they are totally pug-ugly.

Its older sister the PC-21 is a far better looking aircraft...
http://www.airforce-technology.com/u...es/pc-21_6.jpg

Agree, and the helicopters are no better. Spindly tail booms but grotesquely big fenestrons...

LJ.

Whilst I agree the PC21 is better looking than the Texan it can't really be described as a sister. Distant cousin maybe?

Looks aside, the PC21 is far more aeroplane than you need. T6 is actually perfect for the job and well proven. But ugly.

As for helicopters, they're all ugly.

BV

BV

I agree "butt ugly" it is! :p

LJ

So what is beautiful in your humble opinion ? lol

I will be attending RIAT friday and sat on professional level thus all of Ascent's assets will be there even Juno and Jupiter

Cheers

Rathyeon took a reasonably attractive aircraft in the PC9 and made it ugly. Probably to make future A10 and F18 drivers feel better about their mounts

Chopper.

Anything with a spinning roof is inherently wrong.

Remember in simple terms an aeroplane should land and then stop. Not stop and then land.

I should point out that right now I am the wrong side of a well developed game of Tink and couldn't even name my first born child.

BV

dim ejectio ???????:) or simply 'allan':ok:

Or, in the vein of 'poppity-ping' for a microwave, perhaps 'bangitty seat yeah'

RAF weighs training balance as new fleet nears use
 

Flight Global article RAF weighs training balance as new fleet nears use

Snipped:-
(My bold/italics)

Given the complexity of current & future single-seat FJ operations, a realist target?

If you discount my first ever solo, which was in a Kirby Cadet Mk III, then my first ever powered solo was on the JP.

My first ever was the JP3. :ok:

QUOTE=Roland Pulfrew;9850998]If you discount my first ever solo, which was in a Kirby Cadet Mk III, then my first ever powered solo was on the JP.[/QUOTE]

My first-hand knowledge of the flying training sytem spans the period 1987-1993. I am clearly mistaken, but I had recalled that without apprx 30 hours powered flying (eg a Flying Scholarship) pilot trainees went firstly to EFTS on the Chipmunk. I think this scheme was preceded by one that involved a Flying Selection Sqn, again on the Chipmunk, but I don't know when this changed over. It does seem puzzling that, if these schools existed as I recall, that candidates with no flying experince were going straight to BFTS.

I do recall that, having done a Flying Scholarship, I felt that getting experience on the UAS was vital as I would miss out on EFTS. Wasn't there also a long/short option at BFTS? I can't recall how that was decided.

In 1980, when I started RAF flying training, my first experience of flying was 14 hours on the Chipmunk followed by the JP5A at Cranwell. As students did not go solo on the Chipmunk at that time, my first solo experience was at the controls of a JP5A. Happy days indeed.

Me too in a JP3

Indeed, that sounds about right. By my recollection, ex-UAS students went straight to Cranwell to fly the JP5.


The rest of us went via Flying Selection Squadron at Swinderby for 14 hours in the Chippie, no solo, then onto Linton & Fenton for the JP3. Fast Jet guys then went JP5 at those stations.

To be fair Brain you are correct. Sadly I am that old and I went through Flying Selection Squadron, just like JAJ. Those with no previous flying experience went to FSS, got 14 hours on the Chipmunk T10, were taken to solo standard but never sent solo :( and were only assessed as suitable to move on to BFTS or not; one or 2 from my course were assessed as not and went on to other branches. For the rest it was off to one of the 3 Basic FTSs (CF, Cwl or L-o-O) for the JP and our first solos.

For those worried about EFT with retractable undercarriages, well that's what runway caravans and flare pistols are for. Do we still have runway caravans and flare pistols? :uhoh: