flip flop

yep agree, it's usually hot shot.

i'm sure you remember (it was a long time ago for me as well) that WLLTDB stands for Working Line Limiter Trim Datum Bias. ;)

L Peacock,

For once, I stand corrected with on my RB199 knowledge!!:eek:

It is indeed Trim Datum Bias. I applaud your memory of such mundane TLA's!!

I did actually have to go and break open my Cottesmore Tornado School Notes then!! And in honesty was confronted with page after page of "Lowest Fuel Wins" notes that I'd hoped to forget years ago!!

I'll trade you your "Trim Datum Bias" tweaks for a good old Hot Shot clean though!!

Regards,


Flipflopman

ISTR a similar event happening at Coningsby in the early 90's. The remains of the mainwheels and brake units were most impressive.

Bad luck for the team whose post-minor air test it was though.....

And also LP,

Tweaking the WLL, wouldn't help you relight the Burners. It'd just set a slightly different Aj for the DECU/MECU to take control and stop the Burners from lighting up


Flipflopman

Cutting through all the bull sheisen, are Tornado engines weedy? :}

Flop Flip
You're right, it's often the hot shot, i've already agreed. But, more than once, I've come across the WLL locking a burner out, though on reflection it was down to a dodgy turbine diff px tranducer or completely wrong MECU setup on intallation runs.

and XL391, yes a bit weedy in dry power.

Is this you, and them ----

http://www.saap.co.uk/Tornado-2.wmv

SF

Working Line Trim Thingy
 

Casting my mind back to a classroom at the RR Filton factory, I distinctly remember an ex-Shack Air Eng called Len Schofield telling us about the fluidic flip flop valve (Turbine Pressure Ratio Transducer) that compared pressure either side of the LP turbine and ensured that the RHFCU would stop delivering fuel if the ratio got too high or too low. There is even an urban myth that it was intended to form part of the active feedback loop for fuel control in reheat, such that nozzle opens, fuel flow increases, TPRT detects change in pressure ratio, fuel is trimmed accordingly.

It was also a useful tool for fixing a sticky nozzle in the days of vactric motors. Having waggled taxy nozzle a few times, you got the pilot to drop the offending engine into ENC (which often took some explaining), disconnected the RHFCU fuel solenoid, got the slightly concerned pilot to reset the ENC and 'exercise the throttles up to max reheat', explaining that it couldn't light but would 'blow out' because of the TPRT and drop to the normal dry nozzle area. After returning the nozzle to ENC, simply reconnect the RHFCU solenoid, step smartly away to the side of the aircraft and invite the pilot to try again - 8 times out of 10 this would result in heat, flames, noise and a happy pilot :ok: , occasionally followed by a scowl from the SEngO for conducting reheat runs on the pan! Oh the happy days of TWCU.

XL391 Yes a wee bit on the weedy side. But then again if you ask any pilot of any aircraft what you could do to improve the aircraft that he flies the number one response is "Give it Bigger Engines"

Number Two is "Give it a Bigger Wing"

So nobody is ever happy.
Give me 50,000 KN Thrust I'd want 60,000KN Obviously!:E

Reheat in the Swift.
 

Air Defender,I completely agree. The engines on my B777-200 only push out 93 400lbs of thrust. I want those big babies fitted to the -300s which push-out 115 000lbs of thrust per engine.:ok:

False Capture,

If the Tornado had that much thrust it would be a pleasure but to return to the begining of the thread it wouldn't sound nearly so good and it wouldn't look so good getting airborne at dusk! Carrot power is the way ahead, the choice of champions and it reminds people how quiet the airliners actually are.

'Are Tornado Engines Weedy?'

Not when you consider they are only slightly bigger (physically) than a packet of Rolos! Weedy or Efficient? I aggree tho, more thrust is always better.....:E

Advo

Sheep fancier,

Yep

Sheep Fancier.

It's them...

... and me. I was in the back of the second GR4 (callsign Midas 2), having just spent a very enjoyable evening with UGSAS taking part in a Tornado capabilities brief for the students, ably given by the crew in the first GR4 (Midas 1) that took off about 5 minutes before. See also the thread on the UGSAS reunion.

In answer to Speed Restrictions question, we could have got airborne without the reheat, but for (most of) the reasons already given, and to improve the safety margin had it failed, we used it. Besides, if you had it, it would be rude not to use it. Makes you guys sound positively quiet to.

SR. Hope you had a good trip but I bet it wasnt as much fun as the one we had on the way back to Lossie.

To OC UGSAS all the staff and students we met on the Thursday night, thanks for a great time. To Midas 1, thanks for organising a great night out.

CJS

CJS- 'We could have got airborne without reheat'- Really? Using what ODM data would that be?

Silly Boy :=

Tonkas Take off WITH Blower, Always.

Advo

CJS I guess I'll see you through a haze of beer at the UGSAS re-union then.:ok:

Advo.

Before you go wagging your fingers around and slagging people off I wonder if you have checked out the video. If so, you would have seen that the jets we were in were clean (and it was also pretty cold on Friday morning) and whilst I agree that Tornado take offs are always with reheat (for all the reasons discussed), I believe we probably could have got airborne without it.

However, the reason for me posting the thread was not to invoke a discussion on the merits of the ODM or the servicability of the Tornado reheat and whether it can or can't get airborne on 9000+ feet of runway. It was to pass on my thanks to the people at UGSAS who hosted us so well and to the junior crew who organised the night out and who gave an excellent presentation.

Negative comments and finger gestures directed towards people who are trying to use PPRuNe in a positive way is what gives this site such a bad reputation. Next time why not email the person directly or alternatively, keep your comments to yourself.

CJS

CJS,

Whilst I aggree, that positive use of pprune to say a heartfelt 'Thanks' is laudable, the facts remain. Even on a 9k runway, on a cold day a Tonka taking off in 'Dry Power' would be both foolhardy and dodgy at best. (Clean or otherwise- By the way you had outboard stores).

In my view, stating that it 'could' have been done or even voicing the consideration on this forum was ill advised; It couldn't, and it shouldn't.

I do however appologise for the finger waving, that really was uncalled for. Glad you had a nice evening.

Advo

Slightily O/T
 

Seem to remember the Buccaneer getting airborne at 50000lb's AUW with a pair of 11000lb thrust Speys without any problem? And without the high lift devices of the Tonka? Interesting to know what would have happened though if you did lose one late on down the runway.:eek: