dark light

Tridentville

Marvellous sight

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

635

Send private message

By: TRIDENT MAN - 1st November 2004 at 20:01

The RB162-86 turbojet (Booster) was only used in high tempreatures or high payload,the boost was selected by a switch on the P2s panel ,the engine cut out automatically at around 2,500 ft ,on another note the Trident was also known as the Gripper and Tripod ,also the Trident Three had a total of 5 engines if you count the APU.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

635

Send private message

By: TRIDENT MAN - 1st November 2004 at 20:01

The RB162-86 turbojet (Booster) was only used in high tempreatures or high payload,the boost was selected by a switch on the P2s panel ,the engine cut out automatically at around 2,500 ft ,on another note the Trident was also known as the Gripper and Tripod ,also the Trident Three had a total of 5 engines if you count the APU.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,215

Send private message

By: Whiskey Delta - 26th October 2004 at 14:31

Thanks Pablo. What a bizarre arrangement.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,215

Send private message

By: Whiskey Delta - 26th October 2004 at 14:31

Thanks Pablo. What a bizarre arrangement.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

927

Send private message

By: Pablo - 26th October 2004 at 13:17

I vaguely remember seeing Tridents at MAN in the very early 1980s – I must have only been 3 or 4 at the time. Very memorable aircraft and sadly missed.

I also found a short but informative article on the boost engine:

BEA returned to Hawker-Siddeley and instead chose a stretched version of the basic Trident, the HS.121 or Trident 3. The 3 included a fuselage stretch of 16ft 5in for up to 180 passengers, raised the gross weight to 143,000lb, and made modifications to the wings to increase its chord. However the engines remained the same, and BEA rejected the design as being unable to get off the ground in hot-and-high conditions, given that the 2E was having so many problems already. Since the Spey 512 was the last of the Spey line extra power would be difficult to add. Instead of attempting to fit a new engine, which would be difficult given that one was buried in the tail, Hawker-Siddeley decided to add a fourth engine in the tail, the tiny RB.162 turbojet, fed from the same intake as the middle Spey. The engine added 15% more thrust for takeoff, while adding only 5% more weight, and would only be used when needed. BEA accepted this somewhat odd mixture as the Trident 3B. BEA ordered 26, the first flight was on December 11th, 1969, entering service on April 1st, 1971. A simple change resulted in the Super Trident 3B, 2 of which were sold to CAAC.”

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

927

Send private message

By: Pablo - 26th October 2004 at 13:17

I vaguely remember seeing Tridents at MAN in the very early 1980s – I must have only been 3 or 4 at the time. Very memorable aircraft and sadly missed.

I also found a short but informative article on the boost engine:

BEA returned to Hawker-Siddeley and instead chose a stretched version of the basic Trident, the HS.121 or Trident 3. The 3 included a fuselage stretch of 16ft 5in for up to 180 passengers, raised the gross weight to 143,000lb, and made modifications to the wings to increase its chord. However the engines remained the same, and BEA rejected the design as being unable to get off the ground in hot-and-high conditions, given that the 2E was having so many problems already. Since the Spey 512 was the last of the Spey line extra power would be difficult to add. Instead of attempting to fit a new engine, which would be difficult given that one was buried in the tail, Hawker-Siddeley decided to add a fourth engine in the tail, the tiny RB.162 turbojet, fed from the same intake as the middle Spey. The engine added 15% more thrust for takeoff, while adding only 5% more weight, and would only be used when needed. BEA accepted this somewhat odd mixture as the Trident 3B. BEA ordered 26, the first flight was on December 11th, 1969, entering service on April 1st, 1971. A simple change resulted in the Super Trident 3B, 2 of which were sold to CAAC.”

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

95

Send private message

By: Super Guppy - 26th October 2004 at 12:55

That takes me back to my spotting days in the late 70’s.

I actually used to get really bored when ‘yet another Trident’ landed.

How times change – I would love to see one flying again now !

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

95

Send private message

By: Super Guppy - 26th October 2004 at 12:55

That takes me back to my spotting days in the late 70’s.

I actually used to get really bored when ‘yet another Trident’ landed.

How times change – I would love to see one flying again now !

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

10,629

Send private message

By: Bmused55 - 26th October 2004 at 07:45

not for nothing was the trident nicknamed the ‘ground gripper’ 😉

lmao

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

10,629

Send private message

By: Bmused55 - 26th October 2004 at 07:45

not for nothing was the trident nicknamed the ‘ground gripper’ 😉

lmao

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,017

Send private message

By: paulc - 26th October 2004 at 06:54

not for nothing was the trident nicknamed the ‘ground gripper’ 😉

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,017

Send private message

By: paulc - 26th October 2004 at 06:54

not for nothing was the trident nicknamed the ‘ground gripper’ 😉

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

11,401

Send private message

By: Ren Frew - 26th October 2004 at 01:30

Very unusual. Any idea how it was controlled by the crew? Did it have thrust control or was it just lit and run at full power?

I’m not certain but I know it was a variant of the RB108 engine which was used in the early days of vertical lift experiments (the Kestrel/Harrier). Presumably it had variable thrust when applied to the Trident 3, but then again the whole point was to help the thing get off the ground,so max thrust at all times I’d imagine ?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

11,401

Send private message

By: Ren Frew - 26th October 2004 at 01:30

Very unusual. Any idea how it was controlled by the crew? Did it have thrust control or was it just lit and run at full power?

I’m not certain but I know it was a variant of the RB108 engine which was used in the early days of vertical lift experiments (the Kestrel/Harrier). Presumably it had variable thrust when applied to the Trident 3, but then again the whole point was to help the thing get off the ground,so max thrust at all times I’d imagine ?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,215

Send private message

By: Whiskey Delta - 26th October 2004 at 01:18

No, it’s an RB.162-86 5250 lb thrust boost jet, fed by side inlets normally sealed by power-actuated doors. Used during take-off and initial climb. Only installed on Trident Threes.

Very unusual. Any idea how it was controlled by the crew? Did it have thrust control or was it just lit and run at full power?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,215

Send private message

By: Whiskey Delta - 26th October 2004 at 01:18

No, it’s an RB.162-86 5250 lb thrust boost jet, fed by side inlets normally sealed by power-actuated doors. Used during take-off and initial climb. Only installed on Trident Threes.

Very unusual. Any idea how it was controlled by the crew? Did it have thrust control or was it just lit and run at full power?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

11,401

Send private message

By: Ren Frew - 26th October 2004 at 01:14

Is that “4th engine” at the lower portion of the rudder an APU?

It was either the extra pod engine or a steam catapult to help the Trident 3 get off the ground. 😮

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

11,401

Send private message

By: Ren Frew - 26th October 2004 at 01:14

Is that “4th engine” at the lower portion of the rudder an APU?

It was either the extra pod engine or a steam catapult to help the Trident 3 get off the ground. 😮

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,748

Send private message

By: MANAIRPORTMAD - 25th October 2004 at 23:34

Nice picture, and certainly a nice sight which will always be missed!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,748

Send private message

By: MANAIRPORTMAD - 25th October 2004 at 23:34

Nice picture, and certainly a nice sight which will always be missed!

1 2
Sign in to post a reply