Sadly, often it seems to be the case that non native English speakers are better able to express themselves in English, both orally and in writing, than many of those for whom it is their mother tongue. !
Then you have never heard the Dutch speaking English.
http://www.bol.com/nl/p/nederlandse-boeken/i-always-get-my-sin/1001004002618081/index.html#product_images
Btw to correct your sentence it is ‘both oral and written’.
Hope this helps.
PS
Scroll through the pages, you’ll get a rough idea
Having watched retraction tests on many occasions I wish you luck.
I now wish I had filmed it at the time.
I’m sure Olly can help you but I’ll also have a look around to see if I can find anything.
The mkV was fitted to the Hawker Tornado, a close relative of the Typhoon.
It’ll still look good in my front garden.
I’d sooner shoehorn it into a car.
Exactly.
Cheers,
Logan
It proves nothing because you miss the essence of the Black Buck operations.
There were so many Victors needed because of the lack of transferable fuel, not because of the refuelling system used. The Victor was limited in the amount of fuel they could take on due to structural considerations. Even if they could have gone with a full load it would have only been some 16,000lb more.
All you are showing is your knowledge is second hand and poorly interpreted at that.
Incidentally, were those damaged F-18s trying to get refuelled by drogue-fitted KC-135s? They have metal drogues which are very unforgiving for the recieving pilot and airframe. Normal drogues are made of canvas.
All the drogues I worked with were actually a metal basket with a canvas ring for protection. The canvas ring was also a handy thing to fit the luminous bulls eyes in.
You were trying to state that a boom going out would leave you up a creek without a paddle. That’s correct, but it’s also rare enough that it’s a non-issue. Far more common, however, is a hose not unreeling, damage to either the hose/basket or the receiver due to a collision (P&D refueling requires far more proficiency on the pilot’s part than boom), or a probe getting bent, broken, or just deciding not to work that day.
Cheers,
Logan
That is a gross exageration in my own experience. In the four and half years I was involved in P & D tanking I can only think of four or five instances where there was a hang-up requiring an abort of a mission or change of profile. That was in the bad ole days of mk20b and mk17b units, which were notoriously ‘unreliable’.
Yet somehow, hose-and-drogue refuelling isn’t even seriously considered :rolleyes:
Rather ironic when you consider the probe and drogue system was first developed by FR to fill a requirement from the US airforce force for an automatic air refuelling system for fighter aircraft.
Compared to:
Victor
Either 55800kg fuel off-load, or 9,200 gal /(41,823 litres) (different sites hence disparity in values)
It was a little more complicated than that. First 55800kg gives you 122760lbs, the Victor could take off with a max of 126000lb although he could then top up once airborne to a higher value (sorry can’t remember the total anymore) even so it gives you very little to fly on if you off-load 122000lb. The other factor (at the time) was that of the Falklands the Victors had been restricted to 110000lb due to wing problems
None, the RAF will be cut out altogether.
To be honest it’s 50:50. Who do you believe less? The Guardian or the politician?;)
To be honest if either would bid me a good day, I would look outside first to check if it was.
As for the rest, we will indeed have to wait until the next election. After all, a week in politics……………………
You mean you’re willing to believe a politician?
I didn’t know that US Navy shipboard-certified jet fuel HAD a wiring diagram?
That’s because we know it as avcat or F44:D
Huh typical blue jobs, part timing again. For us brown jobs it was 0630 (Reveille in old days) and 1800 (Setting the guard) summer or winter. Always knew the RAF only worked part time:D:D
Just goes to show, you should have learnt a trade:D