Empire Test Pilots School 80 years
 

ETPS celebrates 80 years this year.


And I remember the BBc1 series in the 80s.

cheers

Great course and the most highly qualified pilots in the RAF, well done :)

Of course in these PC, post-imperial days you will have to look very hard on the QinetiQ website to find any recent references to what ETPS actually stands/stood for. :O

I flew with many of these guys at Farnborough; it was nothing to fly (say) a Hunter in the morning, followed by a Wessex after lunch and then fly the evening Bedford Ferry in a Devon.
Whenever I flew, I always got excellent instruction from them even though I only had a PPL.

Although it’s sad to see the reduction in the fleet, at least ETPS is still going despite competition from ITPS. A good overview, just missing the great DS.

The PC-21 looks like a rocket ship compared with the T-6 II. Has anyone here flown both the 21 and T6 II? How do they compare?

Always assumed the T6 II was a pimped up PC-9.

I had the honour of flying with Hedley Hazledon while training on the F27, back in '79. I understand he was on the first ETPS course in '43. In other words, he was a test pilot some three years before I was even born!!

Always assumed the PC-21 was a pimped up PC-9.
And the PC-9 was the pimped up PC-6.

Stitchbitch
 

I guess ‘rocket ship’ is a very subjective term. ‘Jet like handling’ is something I hear quite often as well. I wouldn’t use either label with reference to the PC21 personally. Especially in hot climates.

What I will say though, is that it’s a great training aircraft with a great cockpit. And my God does it turn well (to begin with anyway).

BV

BV,it`s all that `extra air`blown over the wing from that `spinny thing` on the front....

Yes, the hardest part was converting it from a high-wing to a low-wing. :O

Er delete PC6 insert PC7; amazing nobody else noticed!:O I should know the differences between the -6, -7, -9 and -21 considering I've seen them at the airshow often enough. The PC-6 driver at the airshow one year wanted to use the Harrier ski jump but the organisers wouldn't let him.
As for the T-6 Texan II; I think that was derived from the Beech Mentor not the PC-9; there was a piston version of that at one airshow.

No, the T6 Texan II is a licensed development of the PC9.

At one point, a long time ago, USNTPS decided to reject all propellor powered aircraft; similar Navy-wide dictum requiring two engine aircraft.

Ill-considered judgment dumped the T28, piston engine, then realised the loss of a unique spinning aircraft and 'torque' during takeoff. Beaver and Otter retained, as were guest appearances in P3, Mohawk, and Bronco.
Times change:-

https://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/usntps

Sycamore
 

I thought that was the air con system. I need to take another look at the aircrew manual. It seems I have misunderstood.

BV

I think you mean RAF, Navy and AAC

No, I meant of RAF pilots, they are the most highly qualified.

And if you are trying to prove a pathetic point, you forgot Singaporeans, Australians, etc.

How about we say "The most highly-qualified pilots in the Free World?" Or would someone take issue with that?

Please excuse a non-military person. It’s not to do with actual flying, my CPL (sorry) navigation instructor, Ron Bayne (aka rapid Ron Bayne) at City Poly (latterly changed to London Metropolitan) was an excellent instructor. I recall hearing he ‘was’ at ETPS’ and also a Vulcan pilot.

He helped me enormously in the classroom. If my memory is correct then he was a great example of the ETPS if not he was still brilliant.

If not appropriate please delete with no issues

Unfortunately there's always an impotent keyboard warrior looking to take issue with anything and everything ;)

Both the T6 and the PC-21 were flown as part of the ETPS selection process​​​​​​ about 5 years ago. The PC-21 was assessed to be far better for the course’s needs. That doesn’t necessarily say that the T6 isn’t good, it just didn’t do what was assessed to be necessary for ETPS.