Qinetiq embraces much of UK’s military Aero Acceptance Authority. The turn likely to be taken by Frank Carlucci’s Carlyle Group, selling so soon after investing, is justified by Ministers by their having purged a culture of timelessness. Let us hope that’s not all they’ve expelled. It would be unfair to mention Albemarle, Botha, Buckingham, Lerwick, Welkin or (first) Whirlwind, so I won’t. I won’t dwell on Belfast, Seamew MR.2, or Swift F.1: this is all behind us now. Let’s stay with Systems-intensive devices, and let’s hear it for:
1. Blue Steel, eventually given low-level Release, but never credible in QRA mode – says Wynn’s Official History. This weapon was built by Avro, but was the creature of RAE/RPE/RSRDE, who seldom talked to each other. If the fuel didn’t get you, the battery did;
2. Violet Club, UK’s first H-Bomb, deployed late-58, withdrawn early-59 as USSR’s secret weapon, hazarding Rutland;
3. Red Beard, UK’s tactical nuke, never cleared for low-level release, thus bringing Buccaneer S.1 up nicely into Sverdlovsk sights;
4. RAE Bedford’s 20 years on Blind Landing Leader Cable:dug into Brize Norton, never utilised.
In mitigation, Air was not alone: not only PTR377 or Clansman, but any UK radio, ever; RN piracy to replace issued optics with loot from U-Boats; any UK torpedo – Conqueror’s Captain as he stalked Belgrano changed brand-new Marconi/AUWE Tigerfish for Westinghouse, 1927-designed: he spoke of his need for “confidence”. Nor did UK have a monopoly Approving the unworthy:
USSR: Sputnik’s launcher, withdrawn as ICBM within months; Galosh ABM, withdrawn when they realised that first detonation would EMP-blank the rest of the salvo.
US: Davy Crockett atomic SSM: range 2km, radius of lethality: 2.5km; Snark nuclear SSM: withdrawn 4 weeks after deployment; B-2, Released after 20 years’ gestation, grounded (briefly) one week later after the Sqd. first flew in rain and lit up everyone’s scopes.
More, please – not ghastly designs, as in World’s Worst books, but inept Releases.
By: stuart gowans - 1st March 2006 at 19:11
The mini was a brilliant little car, and no you didn’t need to drop the engine to change the gearbox oil, as it was designed to compete with the motor bike and side car, the best description for the engine/gearbox arrangement was “unit” i.e the engine oil was the gearbox oil. Whilst the oil needed to be changed more regularily than a seperate arrangement, the gearboxes were bullet proof with the exception of the drop gear, which due to being helical had a tendancy to force its way out of the casing when the engines were extensively modified (the cure was straight cut gears). I personally never had one cut out in the rain ,but by virtue of the fact that the distributor was located at the front it needed waterproofing when fording. I did read somewhere that part of the Swifts problem was due to an un-named subcontractor making a tiny modification to the fan blades of the Avons subsequently fitted to the Swifts.
By: alertken - 1st March 2006 at 11:28
LesB’s Basset note shows the power of a Board like this and why, say China, doesn’t like them. Any gibberish gets sorted fast, while real info survives. The published reason for Basset’s decline was that the “Requirement” to taxi a full V-Craft crew went away.
By: hunterxf382 - 1st March 2006 at 00:48
It was the hot air escaping from the cannon firing entering the intakes which caused the Avons to surge (didn’t happen with Sapphires though) – presumably as well as catching the shell casings the Sabrinas dissipated the hot exhaust from the cannon thus preventing it from affecting the engine airflow..
The mod that fixed the hot air surge problem was blast deflectors fitted to the muzzles…
By: dhfan - 28th February 2006 at 23:34
Can’t argue with most of this and I personally believe Issigonis should have been shot, not knighted, for designing the Mini. However, dropping the engine to change the gearbox oil is gibberish. The gearbox was in the sump and shared the engine oil. Unfit for purpose, 20W/50 is not gearbox oil.
By: Snapper - 28th February 2006 at 23:00
Haven’t a clue what this all means, but…..
JDK “I believe there were failings in the Falklands of basic military clothing (anyone know?)”
The boots. Absolute crap DMS boots. Trench foot wet toes. Unfit for purpose. Squaddies rob hi-leg Argie footwear. Clarks manufacture Hi-Leg Mk.1 for British Army. Shin Splints. Unfit for purpose. Manufacture Hi-Leg Mk.II Infantry, for the wearing of. Fit for purpose but squaddies buy Hit Tech Magnums anyway. Fit for purpose and Gucci kit. Named Go Faster boots.
Anyone else know that the squaddies favourite, goretex, glows like a frigging beacon under a starlight scope? Unfit for purpose.
sources? memory and gin. Snapper – unfit for purpose, good night.
By: LesB - 28th February 2006 at 16:30
Totally agree with alertken.
The Bassett was also a case in point. Spec’ed to carry a V bomber crew to far-flung dispersals it was fitted with a set of hydraulicaly operated entrance steps. These were hugely complicated, heavy and folded up like a bit of origami. They weighed a ton, were always breaking down, and had to be totally removed to gain access to the everyday radio and nav kit located in the same compartment. When replaced, it was the devil’s own job to get them to fold up correctly and neatly again within the book params (could take up to a day to sort them out). And then, a Decca rolling map system was fitted with the black boxes housed in the nose crowding out the space for the hyd reservoir and other daily use stuff. And then (again) it was found that with all this weight plus a V crew (and kit) aboard, the damn thing couldn’t taxi on grass! Resoultion – chop the tips off the props to give ground clearance. Result – Bassett couldn’t get up enough power to take off in intended role. Endgame – Bassetts were moved sideways to Comms Sqns and flown as taxis for the airships and the like.
My last sqn was 26 sqn at Wyton, Bassetts and Devons. The Devon was by far the better aircraft.
😉
By: alertken - 28th February 2006 at 15:54
Bristol Belvedere, begun July,1947, first delivery August,1961. Its Napier Gazelle defined it with a tendency to double-dump. Watched by a platoon of waiting braves the lusty pilot, poised to jump, jabbed under his butt at a pot holding 10 pints of incendiary for the Avpin starter. If No.1 duly fired, the procedure was to send energy all the way down the banana to No.2…so, blow-back. “Luckily, injuries (were) limited (to) sprains incurred by crews vacating (in) rather a hurry without waiting for the ladder.” R.G.Bedford,RAF Rotors,SFB,96,P96
The point of these jokes – and I won’t make any more – is the AA/car analogy. Boscombe cleared this furnace because their remit was confined to “Spec.compliance”, and operability in the hands of “average” aircrew. UK did not design for Maintainability and Reliability until Tornado, where Luftwaffe imposed the concept as so many widows had been made by their absence from F-104G. Maybe we didn’t succeed, but the design case set us to trying, unlike, say Javelin:in a plummy place a few days ago: “t’were amazing where Gloster managed to hide the electrical bits…On Vulcans you could at least see the bits instead of doing it all by feel.”
Unfit for purpose. Designers addressed the Performance Spec and ignored practicality. Not just in Aero. We gave the designer of the Mini a K for a machine which died in the rain. Drivers chose girl friends who wore the novelty of panty-hose, ‘cos the book way to replace a snapped fan belt was a workshop job. Drop the engine to change gearbox oil. Unfit for purpose.
Notice a common theme to Gloster and Austin? They expired.
Notice a common theme to RAF King Air, C-17, BD700, KA330? No tradition – in how-to-do-it Spec.; or in the fun game of charging the punter for mods. to give him what he thought he had already bought; or in CA Release after long trials. We are buying function: “ready- hours”. Don’t care anymore how the Contractor does it. Don’t care if the electrical bits are in silly places. Chinook life-cycle was contracted last week on this basis. BAE was bailed out of their MRA4 hole by £billions for “ready hours”. User won’t “approve” Release like he did on Nimrod MR1. Deliver junk: no “ready” hours: no income, lots of expense. Does BAE know what they have taken on?
Airlines did it first. BA’s 1990 777 selection was not of GE in preference to RR engines:the User bought pre-priced power.
By: Camlobe - 25th February 2006 at 18:42
Maybe some lessons are learnt and the knowledge does become of benifit later on. Years after the Aden / Hunter – Swift lesson, the Tornadon’t F3 suffered the same malady. Fixed by electric mods to the fuel system linked to the gun system I believe.
By: Papa Lima - 25th February 2006 at 10:04
As a former “cold war warrior” I find this thread fascinating and actually laughed out loud!
Reminds me of a certain transportable ground-to-air missile radar that took us a year to dismantle, pack, transport a few hundred miles (by road), unpack, reassemble and get working again. At least we then managed to shoot down a few old Meteors that were flying straight and level at just the right distance away!
We hoped that the Russkies would bide their time while all this was going on!
By: Don Chan - 25th February 2006 at 08:36
US: Davy Crockett atomic SSM: range 2km, radius of lethality: 2.5km; Snark nuclear SSM: withdrawn 4 weeks after deployment;
Davy Crockett.
By: adrian_gray - 23rd January 2006 at 10:38
The bits of stencil are well hidden! No doubt he wondered who the hell you were!
Adrian
By: Pete Truman - 20th January 2006 at 19:00
Though I believe the lady herself had two large parts in one of the St Trinian’s movies, if you would like to know what he’s on about… By the way, thanks Ken, I’m 34…
ADrian
I drove through Sampford and saw your Dad opening the gate the other day, as I usually stare at the bungalow to try and pick out the USAF panels on the sheds, he gave me a very quizical look as I went by.
Just thought I’d mention it, softens the tone of this thread a bit.
By: XN923 - 20th January 2006 at 11:58
1954 Hunters, both engines, suffered instability, which was fixed, and Aden efflux blanking intakes. That was fixed by Sabrinas – only the very old understand this.
Swift F.1 was merely unstable, unfixed, scrapped.
It was the hot air escaping from the cannon firing entering the intakes which caused the Avons to surge (didn’t happen with Sapphires though) – presumably as well as catching the shell casings the Sabrinas dissipated the hot exhaust from the cannon thus preventing it from affecting the engine airflow.
Swift suffered similar problems I believe, and worse when they tried to fit two more Adens into leading edge extensions on the wings which caused uncontrollable pitch-up unless the radome was fitted with Blue Circle radar (i.e. a bag of cement).
By: LesB - 20th January 2006 at 10:29
1954 Hunters, both engines, suffered instability, which was fixed, and Aden efflux blanking intakes. That was fixed by Sabrinas – only the very old understand this.
Thought the Sabrinas were cartridge collectors to prevent ejectants entering the intakes. They are certainly not an aerodynamic device. Unless that’s what you mean by Aden efflux. And yes, I’m very old and remember Sabrina as a lady who would never fall flat on her face.
.
By: adrian_gray - 20th January 2006 at 09:28
That was fixed by Sabrinas – only the very old understand this.
Though I believe the lady herself had two large parts in one of the St Trinian’s movies, if you would like to know what he’s on about… By the way, thanks Ken, I’m 34…
ADrian
By: alertken - 20th January 2006 at 09:17
1954 Hunters, both engines, suffered instability, which was fixed, and Aden efflux blanking intakes. That was fixed by Sabrinas – only the very old understand this.
Swift F.1 was merely unstable, unfixed, scrapped.
By: dhfan - 18th January 2006 at 17:49
Remember the Swift? When the guns were fired it disturbed the fuel air ratio through the engine.
Wasn’t that the Aden cannon gun-pack on the Hunter?
By: Beaufighter VI - 18th January 2006 at 15:51
Maybe fuji was refering to the early days, 1968 ish, when they came into service at Colerne, Fairford, & Changi with 48 Sqdn. When the hatches were removed the story was that they had been fitted so that the troop commander could watch his men jump out of the back!
The modification was to fit a plain hatch instead of the dome.
Interesting to hear the story has turned full circle.
By: Pete Truman - 18th January 2006 at 14:25
My god, the lunatics have finally taken over the asylum.
I’ll get me coat.
By: bloodnok - 18th January 2006 at 13:18
Remember the Swift? When the guns were fired it disturbed the fuel air ratio through the engine.
C-130 in RAF service with the astrodome, was quickly removed because of noise on the flight deck
if you mean the cupola that fits over the front escape hatch on the c-130, you’ve got that wrong! a fair proportion of the fleet are modified to take them, and fly with them regularly.
Sign In
January 16, 2006 at 8:15 pm