The CSAS was very good for 60s technology but was far too complex and had too high a parts count to be truly reliable. A modern FBW system would have addressed these issues but it would have been almost impossible to justify the cost versus the limited benefits. The Luftwaffe were considering a proper upgrade as part of their efforts to achieve their 2030 OSD. I've no idea whether this is still the case.

EAP

I was AV on Tornado for over 20 years and I can't remember a jet return in Mech Mode once, in that respect CSAS was exceptionally reliable. Minor failures were more common but it was the GMR that caused the most pain in my experience. Thank god for 12 sided dice:E

As for conversion, the cost would surely have been the major stopper.

I wouldn't disagree by that measure of reliability but how many sorties were lost due to BITE failures and how much time was spent diagnosing and fixing component failures?

EAP

Fair point but you could say that about all the other technology on it. MECUs, PDUs, etc. etc. all of their time.

Wherever we could, CSAS BIT was carried out post sortie, so the loss rate would probably be lower than you'd think. I always thought it was overtested but getting the intervals stretched out was never considered

Pre flight CSAS BITE fail did cost a lot of sorties in the past. Later, IIRC it was reduced from every pre flight to every 10th. As you say, doing it post flight 9 was better. However, you could always bank on getting a jet that some ****er had forgotten to check! :mad:

OAP

Like, er, this-


http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f2...psjnbiafmg.jpg


Jayviator, Didn't you know the Tonka had a back seat, it houses the Boss, with the chauffer up front:E:;)

The souvenir I most wanted from the Tornado was the mechanical 'mixer' unit that converted the left/right and up/down demand from the stick into mechanical rod inputs to the 2 tailerons (so both deflect in the same direction for pitch and deflect in opposite directions for roll). The unit was about 12 inches long in each direction and was a wonderfully ingenious mechanical device. Anyone got a pic?

Where's the GMR? Never had a NHC with that many buttons on a real Tornado so it must be from an F3!

3P

threeputt: I thought that as well. Never saw one that complicated!

RedLineEntry: Ah yes! It was a superb piece of mechanics. Best not mention the crushable struts though!

It all brings back horrible memories of the hell-hole that was Zone 19!

Looks like a German IDS, albeit with a bit missing, so some of it will bring back some memories for you. The old CRPMD has been pensioned off the GR4 too.

Nope. Dry range to reheat range is a simple push-through restriction (probably ball bearing?) and reheat to combat is the same. There's no lifting, rocking, retarding slightly or anything, just push the throttles forwards.

GR4s have a hand controller like that now. It can do all sorts of things to the Litening Pod as well as all the traditional stuff.

Just for information, the difference between max reheat and combat is that when combat is selected, the TBT (actually SOT) limit is raised by 30k. This is sometimes confused with the war and peace switch which is different. The pilot can select combat as well as selecting the TBTRSS switch which is normally set to low and has a thin tell tale wire to show that the switch has been moved. The switch when selected further increases the SOT (stator outlet temperature). These temperature limits are set in the MECU as the engines are (normally) temperature controlled with TBT read by the optical pyrometer. Yes, the detents are ball bearings.

Wait, what?!!! Raised by 30 thousand degrees!!! That's over 5 times hotter than the sun!

Oh, 30K! (as in Kelvin). I had no idea Kelvin was used in any aircraft. Learn something new every day.

.

It is 30K as in Kelvin. In jet engines it is normal for those rated by temperature to be defined in Kelvin. The prime reason being that the SOT (temperature) is a calculated value rather than a measured value. This is not to be confused with the measured downstream turbine blade (TBT) temperature which is expressed in Celsius.

Yep that’s right, it was developed for the ADV stage 2 weapons system enhancement in 1988.
Right again, tried to get MOD to install it on MLU back then but they waited 20 years until they could nick them out of ADVs.
Wrong, an Italian, they forked out for brand new INHCs for their upgrade.