VC 10 Pilots, please.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wiltshire uk
Age: 62
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rainboe: forgive me my cheek, but you said 'we' lost Vc10s at 'Kano and Addis' - surely you mean Lagos- not Kano. (Addis is correct though for the EAA - 5X-UVA )
I know I am not wrong about Lagos -even if I was but a boy - who lived there who had people killed on it. We were all regualrs on the BA and WT VC10 services to LOS via either Frankfurt, or Rome, and thence Kano.
BOAC had just sold the a/c to the Nigerians. The crew was mix of ex EAA people and others I think.
The cause was a combination of ATC and procedural and weather events and the acident was a key pointer in the promotion of GPW and CVR improvements.
I know I am not wrong about Lagos -even if I was but a boy - who lived there who had people killed on it. We were all regualrs on the BA and WT VC10 services to LOS via either Frankfurt, or Rome, and thence Kano.
BOAC had just sold the a/c to the Nigerians. The crew was mix of ex EAA people and others I think.
The cause was a combination of ATC and procedural and weather events and the acident was a key pointer in the promotion of GPW and CVR improvements.
Andes, Air Test and Short Sector
BOAC was still running the “VC Tenderness” adverts, I think, when I went on the Ten in 1971. We hated the state airline, of course 
, but the advert was superb. I don’t think it has ever been bettered, from an aviation anorak’s point of view; although − in later years − our “Caledonian Girls” and “Start Spreading the News” campaigns were pretty good.
Moving on swiftly, as this is the Tech Log forum: am interested that you remember the Andes incident, Rainboe. The aeroplane (G-ASIX, I think) might have been lost, but arrived in Santiago with cracks somewhere up in the “bullet”, which remained undetected until it returned to Gatwick. It even operated the return schedule… We’ll never know precisely what G-loadings were achieved during what had been effectively a mountain-wave-induced “jet upset”, because shifting freight apparently disconnected the power supply to the analogue FDR − which was a lot more sophisticated than the scratch-foil recorders typical on American aircraft.
One European airline with long experience of the Andes (Swissair?) had published an in-house paper about the dangers of flying near the tropopause. From then on, we used particularly to compare the QNHs at Mendoza and Santiago. If there was enough difference, we would avoid the trop by about 8000ft, i.e., fly low. The fact that we nearly lost an aeroplane through ignorance is another example of my mantra: “lessons (not always) handed down…”
Like Rainboe, the most terrifying experience of my career was a CofA air-test (called from home-stand-by), and it also included testing the stall-protection system − up to and including the stall-ident. The VC10 has two duplicate angle-of-attack sensors for this, but no gauges for the pilots; so a temporary bolt-on system is provided for air tests, and a pro-forma for the test crew to fill in. This provided maximum safe values of alpha for the guidance of the pilots. [Despite what Slats One has said above, it is presumably considered possible to deep-stall the VC10 − hence the provision of the stick-pusher.]
Unfortunately, our stall-ident (klaxon, accompanied by pneumatic stick-push), just wouldn’t work at the prescribed alpha values. The captain − our chief trainer, with considerable experience in these tests (it was my first and last) − seemed to be determined to achieve the “push”; regardless. Each time, he had to exceed the recommended alpha to make it go. The final test was conducted with gear and landing slats/flaps. As always, the pre-stall ignition came on first, at about the right value; followed by the stick-shaker. Approaching the stall, the vibration seems to increase; but I’m not sure how much is merely the effect of the stick-shaker. If memory serves, the first attempt was unsuccessful, leading to a second. Suffice it to say, I (like Rainboe?) never thought I would see an IAS below 100kts on a 4-engined jet in flight. When mine was reading just over 90, the captain finally relented. Whether this was to any extent influenced by my protests remains unclear; he may just have reached full up-elevator. We returned to base, and I think the aircraft was later cleared for service.
My shortest flight as PF was an empty ferry Hurn – Gatwick, after a charter to Tenerife-North and back. [Perhaps the only jet capable of flying 150 pax out of a 6000-foot runway on a 4-hour sector.] The clearance was to FL70, I think. Not possible to use “Graduated” thrust for the take-off, as BOH Rwy26 was not on our list of approved runways. At the standard thrust-reduction height of 1500ft, it became apparent that I would have to continue reducing power to avoid busting the cleared flight-level and/or the (227kts?) slat/flap limiting speed…
, but the advert was superb. I don’t think it has ever been bettered, from an aviation anorak’s point of view; although − in later years − our “Caledonian Girls” and “Start Spreading the News” campaigns were pretty good.Moving on swiftly, as this is the Tech Log forum: am interested that you remember the Andes incident, Rainboe. The aeroplane (G-ASIX, I think) might have been lost, but arrived in Santiago with cracks somewhere up in the “bullet”, which remained undetected until it returned to Gatwick. It even operated the return schedule… We’ll never know precisely what G-loadings were achieved during what had been effectively a mountain-wave-induced “jet upset”, because shifting freight apparently disconnected the power supply to the analogue FDR − which was a lot more sophisticated than the scratch-foil recorders typical on American aircraft.
One European airline with long experience of the Andes (Swissair?) had published an in-house paper about the dangers of flying near the tropopause. From then on, we used particularly to compare the QNHs at Mendoza and Santiago. If there was enough difference, we would avoid the trop by about 8000ft, i.e., fly low. The fact that we nearly lost an aeroplane through ignorance is another example of my mantra: “lessons (not always) handed down…”
Like Rainboe, the most terrifying experience of my career was a CofA air-test (called from home-stand-by), and it also included testing the stall-protection system − up to and including the stall-ident. The VC10 has two duplicate angle-of-attack sensors for this, but no gauges for the pilots; so a temporary bolt-on system is provided for air tests, and a pro-forma for the test crew to fill in. This provided maximum safe values of alpha for the guidance of the pilots. [Despite what Slats One has said above, it is presumably considered possible to deep-stall the VC10 − hence the provision of the stick-pusher.]
Unfortunately, our stall-ident (klaxon, accompanied by pneumatic stick-push), just wouldn’t work at the prescribed alpha values. The captain − our chief trainer, with considerable experience in these tests (it was my first and last) − seemed to be determined to achieve the “push”; regardless. Each time, he had to exceed the recommended alpha to make it go. The final test was conducted with gear and landing slats/flaps. As always, the pre-stall ignition came on first, at about the right value; followed by the stick-shaker. Approaching the stall, the vibration seems to increase; but I’m not sure how much is merely the effect of the stick-shaker. If memory serves, the first attempt was unsuccessful, leading to a second. Suffice it to say, I (like Rainboe?) never thought I would see an IAS below 100kts on a 4-engined jet in flight. When mine was reading just over 90, the captain finally relented. Whether this was to any extent influenced by my protests remains unclear; he may just have reached full up-elevator. We returned to base, and I think the aircraft was later cleared for service.
My shortest flight as PF was an empty ferry Hurn – Gatwick, after a charter to Tenerife-North and back. [Perhaps the only jet capable of flying 150 pax out of a 6000-foot runway on a 4-hour sector.] The clearance was to FL70, I think. Not possible to use “Graduated” thrust for the take-off, as BOH Rwy26 was not on our list of approved runways. At the standard thrust-reduction height of 1500ft, it became apparent that I would have to continue reducing power to avoid busting the cleared flight-level and/or the (227kts?) slat/flap limiting speed…
I'm afraid my experience of the VC-10 is as SLF but this fascinating thread has brought back a couple of memories. I was up at Embakasi (Nairobi) one (hot) lunchtime waiting to collect one of engineers who was due in from Malawi. An Ethiopian Boeing 720 taxiied out and in the midst of clouds of black smoke use all the runway and looked as though it was going to go through the dead volcano Ol Donyo Sapuk (?) about 20 miles away. It didn't but an East African VC-10 to Addis taxiied out to the intersection, which was about halfway down the runway and blasted off from there. Doing what it was designed to do I guess.
The other memory was of standing in the queue to get my bags and I overheard somebody ask a BA steward what he thought of the new red/white/blue colour scheme and he replied "It makes us look like b****y British Rail". The BCal guys rather liked that.
The other memory was of standing in the queue to get my bags and I overheard somebody ask a BA steward what he thought of the new red/white/blue colour scheme and he replied "It makes us look like b****y British Rail". The BCal guys rather liked that.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is so achingly familiar! I wonder as to the wisdom of airline Training Captains doing some of the stuff we used to do. The dreadful shaking in the stalls, the demonstrations to all new pilots the Dutch Roll characteristics (with somebody at the periscope station rear left side with periscope up like a U-boat captain observing the fin and tailplane waggling and shaking- really scary sight! No wonder the tail used to crack up and the poor screwjack got overstressed!
Talking about the periscope, you could see the tailplane and top of the engine cowlings through the upper periscope, and looking out through the electronics bay periscope was fascinating too. What an over-engineered aeroplane in places!
Talking about the periscope, you could see the tailplane and top of the engine cowlings through the upper periscope, and looking out through the electronics bay periscope was fascinating too. What an over-engineered aeroplane in places!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Jo90" mentioned the longest VC10 flight in his logbook. What would be the shortest? Didn't BOAC use VC10s between Aldergrove and Prestwick before dedicating a Viscount to the operation? (Does anyone have a photo of that Viscount in BOAC colours?) Weren't there Birmingham-Manchester flights, too? Was the VC10 ever used for those short hops in the Gulf (Abu Dhabi-Doha or similar)?
The shortest I ever did was 9 minutes - Boscombe Down to Brize Norton. We rounded it up to 10 for the log books. Routes like Aldergrove-Liverpool or Liverpool-Teesside were not uncommon.
My longest was 9:35 - Las Vegas to Brize - not bad when the RAF C1 carried all the extra weight of the cargo door and re-inforced floor.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wiltshire uk
Age: 62
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref: VC10 deep stall - Chris- I was not saying the Ten could not or would not deep stall, what I was saying- clumsily it seems- was that unlike other t tailers, no VC0 airframe has ever been lost due- repeat due to a deep stall.
Yes it would stall, and the protective systems then stepped in to stop that stall becoming the deep or super stall.
Of note, such was the excellence of the aerofoil perfromance that the standard VC10 exhibited nose drop at the stall- remarkable for a rear cg, rear pressure biased, T tailed airframe.
EAA gave up the full stall test after several close calls and after persuading the Kenyan DCA that an actual stall was over kill- so to speak.
With its long front fuselage moment arm and very heavy rear end, it is remarkable that the VC10 was so docile at the stall - the ILushyin 62 copy certainly was not!
I worked closely with B. Trubshaw and he told me once flew a VC10 at the very edge fo the stall envelope after an elevator hinge bolt broke - cited in his book -in fact he ordered a bail out and Mayday but that proved imposible so he palmed the VC10 down to safe but hairy landing. BOAC crawled all voer that one.
But he confirmed that that very high tail and very big elevator sweep back saved the VC10 from being a T tail deep stall dipper. Although the 727 has lost an airframe to the dreaded deep stall, that aircraft too had a very high tail and very big sweepback on the empenage - hence its amazing performance- allied to the big slat parasol wing.
The dear old trident was frankly, handicapped by its stub tail adn low power. The Late Grp Cpt John Cunningham told me of a day when he got the Trident nose too high and very very nearly lost his life. It took about 10,000 feet to coem down- nasty- very nasty.
Does anyone remember when Davies of the ARB had a Standard VC10 spin during a flight test and it was discovered that one of the rubber seals on the wing fence was missing on one wing only? Apparrently BOAC discovered 4 others in the fleet with the same problem...
One of my neighbours was Capt Ronald Ballantine- ex Imperial, RAF and
SVC10 senior Captain. He told interesting stories.
Yes it would stall, and the protective systems then stepped in to stop that stall becoming the deep or super stall.
Of note, such was the excellence of the aerofoil perfromance that the standard VC10 exhibited nose drop at the stall- remarkable for a rear cg, rear pressure biased, T tailed airframe.
EAA gave up the full stall test after several close calls and after persuading the Kenyan DCA that an actual stall was over kill- so to speak.
With its long front fuselage moment arm and very heavy rear end, it is remarkable that the VC10 was so docile at the stall - the ILushyin 62 copy certainly was not!
I worked closely with B. Trubshaw and he told me once flew a VC10 at the very edge fo the stall envelope after an elevator hinge bolt broke - cited in his book -in fact he ordered a bail out and Mayday but that proved imposible so he palmed the VC10 down to safe but hairy landing. BOAC crawled all voer that one.
But he confirmed that that very high tail and very big elevator sweep back saved the VC10 from being a T tail deep stall dipper. Although the 727 has lost an airframe to the dreaded deep stall, that aircraft too had a very high tail and very big sweepback on the empenage - hence its amazing performance- allied to the big slat parasol wing.
The dear old trident was frankly, handicapped by its stub tail adn low power. The Late Grp Cpt John Cunningham told me of a day when he got the Trident nose too high and very very nearly lost his life. It took about 10,000 feet to coem down- nasty- very nasty.
Does anyone remember when Davies of the ARB had a Standard VC10 spin during a flight test and it was discovered that one of the rubber seals on the wing fence was missing on one wing only? Apparrently BOAC discovered 4 others in the fleet with the same problem...
One of my neighbours was Capt Ronald Ballantine- ex Imperial, RAF and
SVC10 senior Captain. He told interesting stories.
I think he is referring to the Northwest Orient 727 crew who neglected to turn on the pitot / static heat before take off.
During the climb their indicated airspeed kept increasing (imagine that) and they kept increasing pitch to prevent an 'overspeed' until they finally stalled the aircraft and did not recover.
During the climb their indicated airspeed kept increasing (imagine that) and they kept increasing pitch to prevent an 'overspeed' until they finally stalled the aircraft and did not recover.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: South of Watford
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another short sector was between Birmingham and Manchester then on to New York and vv (1970 & 1971 - BA543/BA544) About 70nm and 30 mins chock to chock. Ok at the start of a day's work , but not so much fun after a night crossing the pond.
