The Last "Man's Aeroplane"?
 

Never having met one, I do admire the young lady "steelies" who adorn crew rooms these days, so I understand. I would have welcomed one as copilot on QRA at Waddo back in the '60s - hand-picked by me of course! - although my wife might not have thought it such a good idea. Apart from this sexist nonsense, I am sure they match their male counterparts in co-ordination, spatial judgement, determination, wit, ability to hold their booze and all the other essential characteristics of the military aviator. Physical strength no longer seems to be a "must" in this age of fly-by-wire and powered flight controls. The ability to withstand 'g' involves the use of certain abdominal muscles which, I have heard, are also important in childbirth, so they may hold the advantage there.

Which was the last aircraft where a certain, and considerable, level of physical strength was a Sine Qua Non ? The Meteor, I think. "Little guys" were sent to the Vampire AFSs (202 and 208). Even so, during the initial dual phase of the course at Driffield and Middleton a few students were identified who could not cope with the rudder loads on an asymmetric overshoot while hand-pumping the gear up (the "ball-breaking" test). They were sent off on Vampires too (the ultimate disgrace!). Aileron break-out forces at 400kts/0.7M usually demanded two hands, which left none for ranging the gunsight graticule.

By contrast the Hunter, even in "manual" was sloppy and sluggish, but should not have presented a problem to a fit young lady. The Canberra on se overshoot was a bit of a handful, but you had a powerful and rapidly-available rudder trimmer. And the Vulcan - well, we never bothered to practise anything less demanding than a double-engine failure (on one side) at max gross. And then the problem, if I remember, was an electrical system one.

Any other bids for the last real macho aeroplane?

As an aside, I cannot help being moved by the facility provided by Pprune for people to pay their last respects and tributes to mates who have "bought it". If it had been available in the '50s , I think there would have had to be a standing thread for the latest Meatbox prang, and it might have been bad for morale. Progress has indeed been fantastic. :) :) :)

Try the Scout in manual. Quite a handful in every sense of the word. Much, much worse that the Hunter. Then the Whirlwind 1 wasn't much better; probably worse still.

Foot loads in the Meteor could be well over 250 pounds - as measured in the "Admirals Barge" at Farnborough. The Canberra was benign in comparison. But the control requirements were not the same as the oscillating 50-100 pounds of the Scout.

I only ever practised in the Scout; it would be interesting to hear from someone who actually had to do a manual landing for real.

Try a double hyd failure in a B412 or a Chinook.

You would need arms like Schwarzennegger to land it safely, and then only with the help of Allah

FV

Actually thought the Hastings was about the same as a Hunter in Manual - but of course that was all the time! Great old girl above about 1000 ft, but circuits could be a bit of a challenge.

On the flare - check, check - Cut! Ga - doinnnnng! Bounce left at the next intersection!! Even the aces would get caught out and get it wrong sometimes.

No question what so ever it was the Old Grey Lady, the Shackleton.

Any bids from the Sunderland fraternity? I believe it needed both pilots on the wheels in certain situations. The Hastings must indeed have been a test of character - judging by the number of "characters" at Lyneham in those days.

I think in one of Charles Graves's books ("The Seven Pilots"?) he mentioned a squadron waiting in trepidation to convert from Wellingtons to Stirlings. The reputation of the latter as a beast had preceded it. Came the day when the first aircraft was delivered, and the crews all came out to watch as the Sterling beat the sh*t out of the airfield and reefed around into a tight fighter circuit, popped the gear down and three-pointed sweet as pie in front of the onlookers. Out climbed the cutest little chit of an ATA pilot. :o

Meteors
 

In my youth, as an instructor on the Meteor T7 in 1952/3, I remember an instruction that we were not to refer to the Meteor as the "Meatbox" as it would have a negative effect on students'
morale. 1952 was the year in which 94 were killed in 150 Meteor write-offs (Wg Cdr Spry)

Last 'man's plane?

Something like an F-16 or Mirage 2000.

Excuse me if I'm wrong but how are the physical requirements lower these days when you can (and in some Air forces) do pull 7 or 8 or 9 or 9+G for a long time when you were typically limited to 6-7G in the '60's early '70's?

Does a woman have the muscle to raise her neck to keep her eye on the bogey at 9 G?...

Hmmm. Makes you think.

Flatus - Don't forget that Typhoon has been over its development partially respeced with the differing female requirements in mind. So modern haircraft are/will be more user friendly at the outset.

Thinking not just requirement for beef here, and thinking more along the lines of boys/toys, I guess there are one or two aircarft that could be voted. Internationally the Bone comes to mind.
The Avro 707 must have been a handful, and of course the P1154 prototype, [Kestrel]. TSR2 ought to feature is ones mind.

I wonder why the RAF aerobatic team decided to go for ferrari red all those years ago ... :)

Maybe my handle gives it away, but there is only one candidate - and I still have the wrists to prove it. The Shack was the last truly manual aircraft in service - and flying it at low level on ASW ops (or even in the circuit) required a fair bit of manual labour and equally strong leg muscles. Incidentally I have had the pleasure to fly the Meatbox, Hunter, Hastings and the Chinook (double Hyds failure in the sim only thank god - and all you can do IS say your prayers), but I would be happy to be corrected by the Sunderland fraternity. :)

Good point, ARXW. But women have smaller brains than men, I have heard, so less mass to support under extreme 'g' ;) Meatbox limits were +6/-2.5g, I seem to remember. But although we had no 'g' suits, nobody seemed to worry about the limits too much. Some of the older squadron hacks were wrinkled to hell. We had at least two on 208 which were regarded as unfit for anyhing but banner-towing and week-end jollies, for which they were kept fitted permanently with wing drop-tanks. :)

I imagine some of the pilots were a bit wrinlked too Flatus!:rolleyes:

Samuel

"Puckered" maybe!

Mike Read

May I ask where you did your instructing in the Meatbox?

Did some time on the Sunderland and don't recall it being toooo hard to handle. It was 'heavy' on the controls, but no more than one would expect on such a vintage machine. Certainly it was no real problem for a 10 stone, 6' tall, hair on fire, bullet proof pilot officer. Had a good crawl through one of 205's Shackeltons at Changi, but never got a chance to have a fly.
Cheers

Last 'Man's Airplane'
 

Though fighting 'g' seems a little off thread, allowing that strength (more accurately physical conditioning) is required, there are those who rightly point out that folks had been pulling 'g's a long time before the advent of the 'g' suit. However, apart from the degree of protection afforded by such apparel under sustained 'g', the suits are particularly useful w.r.t. rapid onset of 'g'. As fighter design has evolved enabling increasingly rapid response to pitch input, anti-'g' devices have become integral.The folks who turn and burn today are still 'real men'(or women!).

Getting back to the subject:D
The mighty F-4 Phantom without a doubt. Big, noisy and ugly!! Loved the look from the first time I saw one.

saudipc-9

Agree all you say. The F4 was undoubtedly one of the all-time greats. But a little girlie could have coped with it surely? We are looking for brutes that needed men to cope with them. Cheers! ;) ;) :)

without wishing to pull the fangs out of the high G brigade (who have my envy and admiration)., the Hastings had to be one of the worst ac to fly in the circuit. It was originally designed as a tricyle (hermes), but the army insisted on in being re-equipped as a tail-dragger. Consequently the C of g was in the wrong place--to go up put the power on and push like hell forward,and vice versa going down which made landing a bit tricky insofar as the pilots coulndt handle the trim change on a go-around without the eng doing the power.
Unfortunately, these unusual characteristics lead to the Abingdon fatal accident when the elevators fell off because they were carrying loads for which they had never been designed.
Shackletons ? PAH!-for pansies.(despite the cold dark nights over the oggin)

Max Prop

Hey, Wheel them in at -6 Boost and then lower the tail. Cheating I know - but no bounces! Well, most of the time, although we always said that Handley Page's finest sorted out the wheat from the chaff below 1000Ft.

The LAST man's aeroplane?

Yep - it was the F4.