CAA & Preserved Military Jets

Do you know if you would be able to fly the BAe Hawk T1?

James

Just remember that the frontline fighters of 60 years ago are making a comback NOW. Its taken the best part of that time to get the correct level of legislation, enthusiasm, etc. Who’s to say that in 60 years time, enthusiasts will not resurrect the ‘forgotten historic aircraft of the early 21st century’ . Americans are flying some pretty heavy metal aircraft on their experimental register already. One day, a tornado or buccaneer will be a feasable option, just not yet. Preserve what we can in as good a condition as we can, and wait for the day we can fly them….

Finally, a sensibable answer, thanks John.

Bex

Bex’s comment about starting some of these old jets is valid I’m sure but the information is out there, I never thought about this before Bex mentioned this but I think I would be able to start a Lightning (after several attempts!!:D :dev2: ), attatch ground power, lift gang bar, open hp cocks, push start buttons……….pppppssssssssssssttttttt….wooooooooooosssshhhh….:dev2: :dev2: :dev2: .

Try that on the F1 (XM135) at Duxford, see if you can find the battery master.;)

Just remember that the frontline fighters of 60 years ago are making a comback NOW. Its taken the best part of that time to get the correct level of legislation, enthusiasm, etc. Who’s to say that in 60 years time, enthusiasts will not resurrect the ‘forgotten historic aircraft of the early 21st century’ . Americans are flying some pretty heavy metal aircraft on their experimental register already. One day, a tornado or buccaneer will be a feasable option, just not yet. Preserve what we can in as good a condition as we can, and wait for the day we can fly them….

Hi,

Will the CAA let you fly the Hawk? and I hear that if you have a ppl you can fly the Folland Gnat.

regards
James

You lot are far too downbeat.

In fifty years time you’ll be able to connect a neural outlet, implanted in the base of your skull at birth or as a retrofit and be able to feel all the sensations of an evening show at Shuttleworth (sight, sound, smells, the breeze on your skin) complete with Eurofighter v Sukhoi mock combats and recreations of Ray Hanna’s best ever flights.

Squadrons of virtual B17s will thunder overhead, the Wright Brothers will give a demo.

All from the comfort of your armchair.

(You’ll probably all be too fat to actually get to the site of an old airfield anyway)

Me?

I’ll be long gone by then :diablo:

Moggy

Airshow in 2060?

Will we have any AVGAS to run the early stuff, or the Spitfires? For that matter, will we have petrol to run our cars?

I suspect the early jets will have been consigned to museums by then as well – the current regulations regarding engine life wont be getting any easier!

Bruce

PS I sincerely hope that my grandkids get to see some low level fast jet action.

By which time minimum height will be 1000ft or more and the crowd line in the next county! Oh, and we’ll all have to wear gas masks for the fumes (assuming theirs still fuel to make them) and dark glasses in case we should inadvertently look at the Sun. (Should climate not cover us in a permanent cloud blanket by then).

Over the top and not realistic? Maybe, but Health & Safety, knee jerk laws, environmentalists etc. have lots of time and who’s to say what future events could bring this about?:(

John

Bex, I was pondering over this at work today and thought to myself; jump 50 years into the future to say 2060 and what will my kids and their kids see when they go to an airshow? There will be some replicas from the 1910’s and 1920’s, a couple of commercials or Moths from the 30’s, heaps of fighters and light bombers from the 40’s and a few early jets from the 50’s. Therefore the first 60 years of aviation will be fairly well represented – what about the next hundred years though? There will be no century or teen series fighters, no A-7, no F-4, no mirages, no F-111’s, no harriers, no jags, no lightnings, no canberras pretty much nothing at all when it is such a classic aviation era. What to do about it? I don’t know, there is too much cost and red tape involved. Will there still be aishows then? I don’t know about that either, it will only take one incident for a warbird to crash and kill some people on the ground before the do-gooders try to ban airshows as being too dangerous. Just think our friends in naval heritage do not get to see a battleship, U Boat or destroyer in action only a few static ones, maybe that is where historical aviation is headed.

PS I sincerely hope that my grandkids get to see some low level fast jet action.

Paul

1) why are people asuming that Tornado’s and Jaguars will be scrapped enmasse. The F-14 is because the Iranians have the type in their inventory. Due to arms restrictions they do not receive spares to support the type. The fear of the parts getting out from museum aircraft was why they were scrapped but I cant really see that have happening. The Tonka and Jag are not used by so called unfriendly airforces so that problem isnt going to result. Plus Jags have already been disposed of into the civil arena. Look at the twenty in store that keep popping up on ebay? And Duxford and Elvington already have Tonkas.

2) And really is a terrorist really going to do damage with a Jag or Tonka? be easier to do what they did on 9/11

Bex

Thankyou Ewan for the reality check. It is easy for emotions to come into the equation, but for the RAF it is all down to economies of scale. I used to work on the Jaguar Engineering desk at Wyton, and pressure was always placed to reduce the current stock holding of spares. This is true for all aircraft fleets and the individual aircraft project team is charged a percentage of the spares value for storing the spares, therefore someone would have to pay for keeping items whether they were used or not. This explains why spares are even more of an issue now than they ever were.:eek:
In addition, current RAF aircraft are worked much harder, having to stay in service for much longer than originally envisaged. IIRC the Jaguar was originally due to be retired c1991 when they were getting close to their original fatigue life. With much work this was increased to 6000 hrs then 7000 hrs resulting in an aircraft that was in service 34 years. Imagine a Spitfire still flying operationally in 1970!

I’m not sure you totally understand the issues of airworthines etc. IF the CAA will not allow an aircraft to fly on the civilian register, there’s normally a good reason. Emotions just don’t enter the equation “Why won’t they let the Lightning fly” etc etc.

In RAF service, the Lightning had a fairly poor accident record, and that was with full-time military and manufacturer support. Now imagine an airframe being cobbled together by enthusiasts on a shoestring and you can see why the authorities tend to back away from it….

The Vulcan has got where it has so far because they have had the support of Marshall Aerospace, and a huge pot of lottery money……..Which as has already been seen, doesn’t last long. Then there’s the running costs. Airshow revenue will not keep the Vulcan flying alone. Insurance costs have also proved to be the downfall of the vintage jet world, and I’m not sure the industry can stand it for much longer.

As for the MOD backing a project to maintain and keep a jet like the Jaguar airworthy, you have to ask what’s in it for them? They haven’t got the funds to keep the air force going as it is…:rolleyes:

I’d love to see a Jaguar kept airworthy and flown, but looking at it in the cold light of realism and cost effectiveness, it ain’t going to happen unless the MOD keep one, say at Boscombe Down, for trials work.

I dont really understand all the regulations, which is why I asked this question about the possiblity of a Joint Civvy & RAF team, and also to get people views on this idea aswell. Theres an awful lot of people on this forum with experience in both the Military & Civillian aerospace, and if people on here reckon its a waste of time suggesting it then Im willing to listen, but also theres the other side of the coin too, if you dont ask you will never know. So whats the worst that can happen? A letter gets ignored or a response saying “thanks for writing but forget about it”.

Bex

Martin, Milt,John & everyone else,

Thanks for youre responses, its certainly going to be interesting, especially if the MOD goes down the lines of the USA, scrap em so the bad guys dont get any 😡 I guess we’ll just have to wait and see, and I also reckon we wont see any more fast jets doing taxy runs either apart from whats already running.

Id also like to see a wouldbe terrorist try and pinch a fast jet without killing themselves, it would also give our wonderful fliers some nice target practice too.

Milt, now my poxy cold has finally gone, I’ll be back on Thursday, not sure on the weekend though, as Heidi has just started a new job at Gatwick, so I’ll keep you posted on that.

Bex

should we be getting together with the RAF and try and form some sort of Joint Civillian & RAF Historical Group to allow these aircraft to fly if the CAA wont allow us to fly them under a Civillian Registration?

I’m not sure you totally understand the issues of airworthines etc. IF the CAA will not allow an aircraft to fly on the civilian register, there’s normally a good reason. Emotions just don’t enter the equation “Why won’t they let the Lightning fly” etc etc.

In RAF service, the Lightning had a fairly poor accident record, and that was with full-time military and manufacturer support. Now imagine an airframe being cobbled together by enthusiasts on a shoestring and you can see why the authorities tend to back away from it….

The Vulcan has got where it has so far because they have had the support of Marshall Aerospace, and a huge pot of lottery money……..Which as has already been seen, doesn’t last long. Then there’s the running costs. Airshow revenue will not keep the Vulcan flying alone. Insurance costs have also proved to be the downfall of the vintage jet world, and I’m not sure the industry can stand it for much longer.

As for the MOD backing a project to maintain and keep a jet like the Jaguar airworthy, you have to ask what’s in it for them? They haven’t got the funds to keep the air force going as it is…:rolleyes:

I’d love to see a Jaguar kept airworthy and flown, but looking at it in the cold light of realism and cost effectiveness, it ain’t going to happen unless the MOD keep one, say at Boscombe Down, for trials work.

“Would it be a good idea for a letter to be written to the RAF / MOD suggesting the idea of an RAF Historic Flight with Volunteers etc?”

Bex

In short, No.

dont take my word for it. next time your about, speak to our Lightning insti, whom has had direct dealings with MOD stance on the above. guaranteed responce from MOD will be “go away”

I think Bex makes an interesting observation one which I thought about albeit from a slightly diff angle relatively recently.

Presently we have a good airshow scene that supports a number of aircraft types.

At some point in the future though there will be a period of aircraft that will not be represented as flyers because they are either to expensive or too complex to maintain and operate. Or indeed a combination of those two factors. My own opinion is that unless a company like HHA operates Tonkas and the likes on a contract I cant see the types ever operating under civil ownership.

So what will that leave us with? Shuttleworth with its string and fabric types, Duxford with a plethora of Spitfires, a few early jets such as a Canberra (type chosen just so you don’t get too down hearted Bex) and eventually some UAV’s to watch.

But lets be honest the RAF does a lot more to preserve its history than many other air forces around the world. Ok we can all say they could improve and fly this or that but we have the BBMF and two RAF museums (which do place a large number of aircraft on loan to other organisations). In recent years we also had the Vulcan and the Vintage Pair which in my opinion isn’t bad going.

Remember the RAF is first and foremost a fighting/peace keeping (or whatever in term the Government wish’s to use) organisation.

Jaguar 12 talks sense. good idea, but will never fly. The bbmf only gets a blank cheque because it is a war memorial, and the Reds are ever more under the bean counters scrutiny at the yearly budget review. the coment about one of the reasons the Lightning couldnt fly, was security…fantasy… The reasons are well known, and it being pilfed wasn’t one of them, afterall, any old, fast jet, such as a Hunter or L139 could be equally capable of delivering a nasty surprise as a Lightning or Phantom in terrorist hands. Speed is irrelevant, since defences would deal with such a threat. As john says, The F3 or typhoon would be more than a match for an ageing Lightning or Phantom with ancient avionics, Either would be neutralised quickly with todays IDS measures.

exactly where is your budding terrorist going to get flying time on a Lightning or Phantom? :p , even IF he managed to get started ( which he wouldn’t since both aircraft would be impossible to start) and taxi on to a run way without ending in a smouldering heap, he would crash before he even got to the end of the runway:rolleyes:

Forum Members Views

Ok Ladies & Gents,

As I forgot to add a poll to this thread, could I therefore ask your views to this question please. When answering please can you quote my question below:

Would it be a good idea for a letter to be written to the RAF / MOD suggesting the idea of an RAF Historic Flight with Volunteers etc?

Bex

Another consideration when preserving ex millitary jet that has come to light since the recent trouble in the USA regarding the retirement and preservation of the F-14.

I do not know the full list of other forces that operate the Tornado but think about this, if our wonderfull government retires the Tornado fleet before others do then would they scrap the majority of the fleet to stop spare parts falling into the wrong hands?.

A lot of posts have also considered that ex-mill fast jets could still pose a threat if used by an undesirable, yes this might be a possibility BUT and this is a big BUT I feel that the Lightning and the Phantom pose no threat to todays Eurofighter, The possibility of getting either jet armed and using it as a weapon would just be impossible and terrorists would not try and use one to fly into a building 9/11 style as the loss of life would be minimal (over hijacking a 747).

Bex’s comment about starting some of these old jets is valid I’m sure but the information is out there, I never thought about this before Bex mentioned this but I think I would be able to start a Lightning (after several attempts!!:D :dev2: ), attatch ground power, lift gang bar, open hp cocks, push start buttons……….pppppssssssssssssttttttt….wooooooooooosssshhhh….:dev2: :dev2: :dev2: .

I would like to think that the RAF could be interested in forming a heritage flight that preserve and fly at airdisplays such as RIAT, Farnborough ect, they should at least consist of a Jaguar (QinetiC still have a flyer), a Phantom and a Tornado, possibly a Canberra pr.9 as these only retired recently and would not be to hard to get back in the air, oh and yes a Lightning:rolleyes: , think of a line up like that lot doing curcuits in formation:eek: .

Regards,

John.

Morning all,

There is no way that the RAF/MOD could be persuaded to divert resources to operate more ‘historic’ aircraft. Resources are fully stretched at the moment and there are no more sacred cows, even the Dead Sparrows are constantly under threat. Deep maintenance of the BBMF is now contractorised and the RAF doesn’t have the manpower to staff an expanded flight.

Jags and Tonkas are expensive aircraft to operate and the reality is that it is extremely unlikely that when Tonkas follow the Jags, either will grace our skies again.:(