Do you have a photo? Preferably showing it’s registration or maintenance number.

I noticed on the picture link you provided that the Tornado aircrews have white crosses painted across the back of their helmets. Anyone know why they do that?

It’s actually reflective tape, they all have it regardless of a/c type.
I suppose it’s easier to see if the pilot has banged out at night.;)

Well, we used to go around the world with only a crew chief and there is not really any reason why the crew cannot do their own Pre Flight Inspection and transit servicing. The Daily inspection can be done prior to departure from base and could normally be expected to remain valid for the departure the following day. However if required the crew could carry out this inspection as well. If the stop was more than one night then there might be a case for some engineering cover. Any parking would of course have to be self-manoeuvring. Whilst most ground handling agents have Boeing and Airbus towbars, Vulcan ones are in pretty short supply. Unless of course the organiser accepted the additional expense of having the item pre-positioned.

If you have any defects that’s another story. If they cannot be carried under the terms of the Minimum Equipment List then you are going to require engineering support and spares. The spares are going to have to come from the main operating base as it would be impractical to carry around or pre-position a sufficiently large range of items to cater for any likely problems.

It is worth bearing in mind that this is now a civil aircraft and the engineering schedule will be be approved by the CAA and not Bomber Command Engineering Staff. The latter would have had a very large pool of manpower (I know it didn’t seem like it at the time!) to carry out the tasks and would have utilised them all. The CAA regulations do not make such assumptions they just require that the schedule is adequate.

The bottom line however is cost. The aircraft is going to be expensive to operate and it will have to be done with the minimum number of personnel.

exmpa

Indeed, although supplies of nitrogen, air, OX38 and OM15 on location would help. A couple of ladders would also be useful:D

That’s correct, 10 in total; one per horizontal surface and primary and secondary for the rudder. IIRC they were made by Hobson. I believe that the elevon PFCUs were all the same but that the rudder units were more powerful. I was once told that the starting load on the rudder units was 600amps!

exmpa

The last I heard some young engineer had “invented” this sort of PFCU recently for commercial a/c. Something about being less susceptable to hydraulic failures and redundency.

(Why no turbofan for TSR.2?) Timing.

Turbojet BE.10 and (later term, turbofan) E.113 originated 1946 for (to be V-Craft). EE’s bid used their (in house) Napier engine; Avro took Bristol and won with (to be) B.Ol.100. EE/Napier sold their scheme to RR, where Griffith cared for it as RB80. Priority to 1950 went on making any Avon work. RB80 was then selected for Valiant B.2, the intended prime production version. Cancelled. Conway retained funding for V.1000(VC7), which died in 1955, but was then bid for Mk.2 Victor/Vulcan, winning one, and for DC-8/40, 707-400, VC10.

Spec for (to be)TSR.2 derives from 1957, when DH Gyron and Ol.200 had higher bench mileage than Conway. RR punted genus Medway, a turbofan of many cousins. Industry was told this would be the last big project, we had excess design capacity, kindly merge. Bristol + (HSAL) ASM were willing to do so around an even bigger B.Ol. RR looked about them, at Napier and DH, and said nah! – just take Medway. At this time BS.53 was a weird experiment. PCB had been filed away after RR acquired W.2/700 (M.52’s engine): it was resurrected for a big BS.53 in 1961, when we also decided to do the SST with France. A modest variant of B.Ol.22R justified them ceding lead to the Rosbifs; any novel type, such as a turbofan for endurance/economy, would admit SNECMA to, at least, equality.

Bit odd by then for the T-S-R type to be thrust on geriatric metallurgy/dynamics. Even odder to be defined by a steam room for valves. Hence the 1961 draft ASR built around quad/electric signalling that eventually became Tornado.

Interesting points, especially about the Avon. It was in fact technology from Armstrong-Siddeley that helped make the Avon what it was(is). Again from my own experiences and what I have read about the Conway with reheat it would have been quite a challenge to make it a reliable and stable engine.
The restrictions in service for the Victor attest to the poor working line of the lp compressor. RR did a series of strain tests in the mid eighties after which stringent operating limitations were promulgated. The Conway had always been a little too much for the intake dimensions so uprating it with the zero stage only made it worse.

Nailed it…according to Bill Gunston’s history of Rolls-Royce engines, RR designed and built a reheat installation for a Conway in January 1959 as potential TFX engine for the US.
It was put together in a week (!) and at first gave a boost of 27.3%, rising to 47.5% a few days later.

Indeed, you are right, I’ve managed to find some info. There were a couple of proposals, one for the Republic F105 and one for the Avro(C) Arrow.
They used an Avon reheat pipe (2000 K) to lash up a test unit.
They had problems with light up and lp compressor surge, also the mixing of the air streams caused alot of trouble.I think the general idea was that there were better engines around.

I don’t have the reference source at my fingertips, but I’m 99 per cent sure RR did bench-test a reheated Conway at some time. Never flew it though.

As far as I know it wasn’t done at Derby.