MoD Tucano Sell Off
 

Having heard rumours of the MoD selling off some of their stored Tucs for some time, and read it recently in March's Flyer magazine, I'm surprised this hasn't created more of a buzz in this section.

I for one can't wait for these machines to enter the GA arena, and will be looking to buy into a syndicate when they do. Would anybody like to have a stab at the price they'd likely go for when it happens.

:ok:

The ones I've seen are missing one minor component.....in the form of an engine. Not a cheap part to replace by any stretch of the imagination!!

There are 5 for sale, all have been on the ground for 10ish years, all missing engine, prop and seatpack, all also robbed in part for spares - so a random assortment of panels, control surfaces, instruments, etc. are missing.

G

There are apparently a new batch of 15 flyers which will be civilianised and sold off

MOD Tucano Sell Off
 

Here's the link for anyone interestered:

http://www.edisposals.com

Click: Aircraft

The first has just been registered with the CAA, G-CEHJ ex ZF373, to an owner from Chester

When I visited Harwarden about 6 years ago there was an unmarked Tucano hangared, which was apparently was damaged when being built by Shorts and never passed to the RAF. It was substantially complete, so a potential source of spares perhaps?

G-APDK

I better start saving my pennies for when these new owners get bored and sell them on!!! (Would love to know how much that one went for........!)

ZF373 isn't on the current auction list, which is ZF265, ZF267, ZF285, ZF340, ZF415.

G

Thats because, presumably, it's already been sold. Here - http://www.caa.co.uk/application.asp...regmark=G-CEHJ

Can't help but notice that the llink states that the aircraft in question was built in 1992..... It strikes me that the MoD may not have gotten full usage out of that particular piece of defense hardware?

Oh Goody!
Another batch of ex - mil aircraft which fly 50kts faster than the civilian pilots flying them!:rolleyes: :ugh:

Genghis - where is the auction list located? and how did Mr Butt get his hands on one before anyone else?

Yawn. Better make sure I never fly a G5 then.......

here - as for the second question, I've no idea.

I confess, I'm looking at buying one - but as an instructional airframe for engineers, not a personal toy.

G

Actually, thinking about it and re-reading G-INFO......because it's on there doesn't necessarily make it airworthy. He may have bought an airframe in bits similar to those being auctioned and stuck it on the register. No idea why unless it has the potential to be restored, who knows? Just a thought.

So long as I don't mind paying the fees, CAA registrations would allow me to put a G-regi on my garden shed. As you say, it doesn't imply airworthiness.

G

You mean the CAA will take your money for nothing?!?!?! Thats an outrageous thing to say!!!:} ;) :E

Ah, but uniquely in this case, you aren't actually required to give it to them unless you want to fly.

G

I see, never knew that. So they only charge for an out-of-sequence reg then? Or does the same rule apply there too?

No, they charge for a reg, and extra for an out of sequence. I forget how much, but it'll be on their website somewhere - £1-200 or thereabouts I think.

G

Genghis - thanks very much for that useful link, I had no idea that they were also selling non-airworthy examples, I do now though! :ok:

They charge for a reg? But you just said they don't unless you want to fly??!!:confused:

Back to the thread...

Having flown a Tucano today for the first time in a few years, I think you'd be mad to buy one. Fun, granted, but for fast A to B you'd be better off in something a little more comfortable. That would be pretty much anything. For general looning around in, buy a Yak / Extra / Sukhoi and you'd have plenty of money left over to run it.

But it's your money!

I know nothing about these, but aren't there quite a few other turboprops of similar performance (e.g. Pilatus) and with a more modern engine?

!!!! - is that so? why? the article in Flyer magazine spoke quite highly of the Tuc. Of course the reporter may not have the comparative experience that you have.

I believe that the reporter (who has flown or owned all of the types mentioned above) specifically stated that he was unlikely to be able to afford to run one on his fleet.

RAFAT,

What's it for? A to B at 240 kt can be achieved in other turboprops without the hassle of protective clothing / uncomfortable bang-seats. The oil system places restrictive time limits on less-than-1g flight, which coupled with monstrous torque and heavy controls means aeros are less fun than in a dedicated steed. I guess people will want them for the best of both worlds...to be able to go places and aerobat if the mood takes. I confess I have no idea what they'll be selling for (and hence how desirable compared with other ac), but maintenance is not likely to be cheap. Furthermore they're not as solid as most other military ac, need tarmac and turboprops are noisy.

If it was my money I'd look elsewhere, but I appreciate the novelty / prestige factor may be alluring.

Thanks for the advice. I've done enough aeros to last me more than a few lifetimes so it wouldn't be for that, simply the appeal of a reasonably respectable touring distance, 240 kts, FL250, and a bit of novelty value thrown in as you point out.

Don't forget, the type has no civil CofA, so you'd have to go through a lot of work to get it into a PtF, then still be restricted to day VMC, and need permission to fly it outside of the UK.

I believe it's possible to get a Pilatus PC7 Mk.1 with an EASA CofA, that would not have those restrictions, and probably be a better aircraft anyway. (Having done quite a lot of flight testing on the Tucano early in it's RAF career, I'd agree with most of !!!!'s criticisms, and could add a few dozen of my own).

But, I still hope that I can buy one, it'll make a great engineering teaching airframe!

G

PC7 for sale here. I want that!!! Ejection seats, HUD, anti-g system, etc. One hell of a toy for a 'I-couldn't-join-the-RAF' type like myself. Are you allowed furniture removal on a civvy aircraft?

I shudder to think what the asking price is though :(

Ginger ;)

Available in the US for between $1M and $2M, depending on spec, times etc.

Nice to travel in - good range with drop tanks and generous luggage space.

Is the Pilatus pressurised?

Looks nice.

That doesn't sound too unreasonable, in a relative sense. It's not like i'm going to go out and buy one now, but if I stumbled across an oil field, who knows?

(I'd probably become a victim of 'regime change' I suppose :} )

Ginger ;)

Genghis - did they ever mod the capton wiring? that stuff was an absolute nightmare for the Engineers.

PC7s are not pressurised - you get to wear a bone dome and oxygen mask. Very Top Gun :cool:

I'd get a D-Jet in that case ;)

I wonder what the oxygen system endurance is at FL250?

Most non-P piston planes have an o2 endurance (assuming say 3 people, FL250) substantially shorter than their fuel endurance. The sales brochure doesn't tell you this of course, yet they do base their speed figures on the FL250 TAS ;)

Was the Tucano Capton wired? I can't recall ever hearing mention of it.


Incidentally the Tucano is also unpressurised with a helmet/mask system. My very vague memory thinks that on 100% O2 you had about 2 hours, but I could be miles out.

G

Yes it was Genghis. Additionally, a lot of the wiring looms were apparently fitted before the skin was, so cable replacement was at times impossible without returning the airframe to the Acceptance hangar at Scampton and removing the skin from the relevant areas! Some cables needed to be replaced as soon as the airframe arrived from Shorts as they were tie-wrapped too tightly causing a breakdown in the integrity of the cable. This was commonplace when it came to the co-axial cables feeding various avionics equipment.

I would assume that the Engineers ironed out these problems over time though so my level of interest remains high.

My involvement with the Tucano was primarily on handling qualities assessments, so I'm unsurprised I didn't know. But, a little surprising - not an aeroplane I'd have expected a major weight issue on, and it's not that plenty of other cost saving measures weren't made elsewhere on the aircraft!

G