I’ve been reading up a little bit on the design of Tornado recently, and it struck me that compared with something like a Lightning or Bucc a Tornado might be a decent candidate for private operation. I say this as it has a decent safety record, a three phase control system (ACAS, Direct Control and Manual) and can be flown safely (as far as I understand it) without the ACAS (auto-stabilisation). It doesn’t seem to have any of the Lightning gotchas such as “lose the hydraulics and it could go anywhere”.
Obviously it wouldn’t be cheap or simple to operate, but having put in so much service in so many hotspots in the last thirty-odd years it would be great if one could be kept airworthy a’la Vulcan.
I am now braced for a snowstorm of comments from current and ex-Tonka people stating exactly why I’m living in cloud cuckoo land, but what the hell, the idea deserves discussion!
By: Ant.H - 1st May 2015 at 20:59
Thanks for clearing that up Andy, I didn’t realise it was still reliant on some hydraulics being available in last resort mode. Looks as though it would get the same shake of the head as a Bucc or Lightning then…
By: AndyY - 1st May 2015 at 19:36
“………….a three phase control system (ACAS, Direct Control and Manual) and can be flown safely (as far as I understand it) without the ACAS (auto-stabilisation). It doesn’t seem to have any of the Lightning gotchas such as ‘lose the hydraulics and it could go anywhere’.”
Just to clarify things – the Tornado Flight Control System has three levels of capability. The core of the FCS is the triplex analogue CSAS (Command and Stability Augmentation System). With a fully-functional failure-free system, the CSAS is operating in full ‘Fly-by-Wire’ mode providing three axis control with rate feedbacks and air-data scheduling. Additional safety is provided by the SPILS (Spin Prevention and Incidence Limiting System). As system failures occur, each axis (Pitch, Roll and Yaw) can independently degrade to ‘Direct Link’ mode. This is a basic electrically signalled path from the pilot’s controls to the control surface actuators. The final level of degradation is Mechanical Reversion. The rudder is centred, the spoilers are retracted, and control is provided in pitch and roll only, by operation of the tailerons (symmetrically or differentially respectively) by use of the mechanical control runs between the pilot’s stick and the inputs to the taileron actuators. In this mode, there are no rate feedbacks, no air-data scheduling and no incidence limiting, so it is very much a limited envelope ‘get-you-home’ capability.
All modes, including Mechanical Reversion, require at least one of the duplex hydraulic systems to be available, as the control surfaces can only be positioned by their hydraulic actuators. If you lose all hydraulics you lose control.
Andy
By: warhawk69 - 1st May 2015 at 19:22
One word afterburners! The CAA certainly don’t like them
By: 1batfastard - 1st May 2015 at 19:02
Hi All
Unless the CAA change their strict ruling I can’t see any Tornado flying in private hands just like the Lightning and Buccaneer that are capable but are grounded due to the CAA ruling (No I don’t know what ruling :D) Such a shame really as if they were even only allowed on restricted operators license say it would give more pulling power to those air shows that could accommodate them.
Geoff.
By: Binbrook 01 - 1st May 2015 at 18:40
Depending when they actually retire them, as there are apparently mutterings about moving the OSD back from March 2019….
At least 40 have now gone into the RTP line and after that the left over shells have mostly gone into the crusher.
Apart from the one at Coventry, and a couple that QinetiQ have/had to play with.
By: David Burke - 1st May 2015 at 17:49
I cannot foresee the RAF releasing any that have any airframe life left.
By: Fouga23 - 1st May 2015 at 17:41
Best candidate:
http://www.za326.com/
Sign In
May 1, 2015 at 4:49 pm