Tiffie On A Perch…

With very strong string. . . .:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Yak 11 Fan
Could be worse, they could have hung it from the roof.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! Don’t put ideas into their heads! Although how do you hang a 40ton bomber from THAT ceiling!

Could be worse, they could have hung it from the roof.

I know what you mean. Lets hope when all the shifting about is done they will put her back on all threes the way she is now doesnt do her justice

Usual wishy-washy reply re. this from Hendon, of which I’ve had a few myself. How it makes the Lanc ‘more dynamic’ is beyond me.

sent an email to Richard Simpson, the keeper of aircraft and exhibits, regarding the typhoon and the lanc, this is what i got back. :-

Thank you for your e mail. It is neither beneficial nor detrimental to
the
airframes to put them up into rigging position. We do not see them
perched
up as you describe it but rather an intelligent way of using a
perfectly
natural position to provide a more dynamic exhibit. The only change we
have
made is to provide a tail stand rather than retain the aircraft on a
rigging
trestle. There are two reasons for this. The first is the need for
the
trestles for our everyday work. The second is purely style we think
people
will prefer the most discrete stand we can design.
At the moment there are two more aircraft up on rigging trestles for
operational reasons and they will come down when the work is complete.
The
DH9A is not actually at rigging position but is up on a low stand to
facilitate floor work underneath the aircraft. The Hanriot HD1 is in
rigging position as technicians continue to work on its moving surfaces
prior to the opening of the GW Factory building.

Richard Simpson
Keeper
Department of Aircraft and Exhibits
[email]richard.simpson@rafmuseum.org[/email]

Hope this helps

Given a plentiful supply of Typhoons, Sabres and pilots with parachutes, I’d like to see the Hendon Tiffie flying as well.

However, as it’s the only one left, it’s better where it is.

Flood

Without wishing to pre-empt David Burkes answer they all look like Harrier varients.

Ah, I see. Well, OK then, they were coming in just as I was going out. And here was me getting excited that somebody else knew about training Cranberries. :rolleyes:

Sorry David, wrong call. 🙁

Spot on Flood – the T.10 was the first T.10 lost by the air force allegedly when the tanks got a little dry!

Originally posted by LesB
David

Hi, see a T.4 in your little list, where was that? And a T.10! The Canberra? :confused:

Without wishing to pre-empt David Burkes answer they all look like Harrier varients.

Flood.

David

Hi, see a T.4 in your little list, where was that? And a T.10! The Canberra? :confused:

As you say, “structural” had to be done in rigging position, but not normally necessary for panel or skin repair. And I don’t recall having to set rigging pos for minors (or majors) as there was too much activity on the kite to maintain the pos. Anyway, as I was mostly on squadrons as a rigger all that sort of hard work (Minors, and above), went to ASF’s and Mod Teams – we only did up to Primary Stars.

I’ve talked with a couple of old Tiffie ground crew (in the 3 Sqn Assoc), one a rigger and the other engines. Both say the Tiffie was a real bar steward to work on and clear snags from. But when they were “set” they were “wunnerful” and were, they reckon, better to “work” than the Hurricane . . .

Hendon’s looks good in that attitude I reckon, at least, as someone said, you can now get a full side view. 😀 😀

Les – everything I have worked on was tresled level in both rigging and whilst having structural repairs carried out. I worked on GR.3/T.4/GR.5/7/T.10 amongst others and it was the norm for both Minor and Majors.

Well I for one would rather see it FLYING! I don`t object to it being displayed Tail Up as it adds a bit of variety to the static displays.
Steve 😀 😀

Regarding trestling aircraft in a level position. This is usually only done when there is need to have the airframe in its normal “flying” attitude to enable flight control measurements and set-ups to be carried out – it is termed “rigging position”.

Cabling, flying wires and a lot of other stuff can only be “set to the book” whilst in rigging position. Undercarriage retraction tests are (usually) carried on with the kite in rigging position. Aileron and elevator droop is adjusted in this position. Now, getting an aircraft into rigging position can be a long and frustraing job (try it on a Vulcan or VC-10!). Each of the three jacks has to inched up or down so that spirit levels, set a right angles to each other, have exactly centred bubbles. The VC-10 has a datum plate mounted inside the nose wheel bay over which is suspended a plumb-bob – getting this centred this is a work of art.

Rigging a Vulcan gave rise to the infamous RAF shout of “Up a penny”, this would mean extending the appropriate jack just enough to get an old style penny between the locking collar and body of the jack. But once in position, the aircraft could happily stay that way for as long as you wanted.

Good lord, such memories come back. I used to know all that stuff! :rolleyes: But somehow I doubt that Hendon’s Tiffie is properly set in rigging position. Might be interesting to ask them, as it does make a difference to equalisation of stresse on the airframe, especially if it’s to be over an extended time. Might just see skin wrinkling in a year or so.

This doesn’t really add anything to the thread, but I thought it may interest you guys. 😀

Coanda – it simply isn’t true that its more likely to break it’s back
tressled in that way. If you look at the vast majority of aircraft you will find that they are designed to be trestled level. In the case of the Chipmunk it is supported just forward of the tailplane
and on the jacking points forward of the wing attachment points.
It is the best way of spreading the load .
In the case of the Typhoon the main u/c is now taking more strain whilst the tail load has been reduced considerably.
It is not detrimental to the aircraft and it certainly isn’t more likely to break it’s back .

Hawker Typhoon, taken June 1998 Caen, Museum of Peace

Breaking into that arguement…
It is a replica… In Caen! European Wrecks and Relics (1st edition) says that it is good enough to pass as an original(!), arriving by 11/88, and is in the colours of 185 Sqn as JP656 BR-S.

Flood.

of course it will, but what I am saying is that, at worst, the aircraft is MORE likley to break its back because it WAS NOT designed to be stored this way.

and what your actually saying is that the centre of mass moves backwards a small amount, no weight moves.

coanda

Coanda- by lifting the tail of the aircraft you are actually reducing the weight acting on the tail leg. Aircraft are weighed level i.e how the Typhoon is – if you lower that tail the weight moves rearwards and the amount of shear loading increases on the rear fuselage .

Steve,

Balanced and imbalanced forces are different things. The aircraft was made to be put on three wheels at the ground angle. By placing the fuselage in that way extra force is being centred on the top rear of the fuselage(it stays balanced but by a different means).

In flight again, forces are balanced and the strength is in place to deal with the forces of lift and to a greater extent, turbulence and air movement. Yes both lifting surfaces do create lift, the whole point of the tail surface is to resist the pitching moment of the main plane. so tail lift(as a moment) is often inversely proportional to main plane lift. Besides providing a lateral stabilising factor the rear fuselage need ideally only deal with the maximum possible turning force created by the tailplane multiplied by a safety factor. And that force is often an instantaneous one, decreasing with aircraft movement.

I hope that goes some way to explain why its just not a good idea to do this……

coanda