dark light

vulcanpilot

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: VULCAN B1 & B2 Difference's #1256813
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    One of the main significant design differences between the B.1/B.1A and B.2 is the electrical system.

    The B.1/B.1A was basically a DC aircraft utilising 4 DC generators, 1 per engine connected to a 4 buses, these being a common No.1 & 2 Gen bus, No 3 gen bus and no.4 gen bus) A 96v battery is connected to the battery bus. In normal operation, the busses are all operating independantly but there is provision for cross-connection (redundancy) should any of the generators fail. There were also rotary transformers to provide the 28V and rotary inverters to give the AC for the avionics.This looks fine on paper but there were instances of all 4 generators failing with reliance only on the battery which in this situation would last about 5 minutes, thereafter all the PFC’s would run down and the aircraft would become uncontrolable 😮 No RAT or AAPP!

    By way of addressing these limitations, plus the requirement for uprated radar (TFR)/avionics (Smiths MFS) etc, the B.2 was redesigned with a 3-phase high-frequency electrical system comprising of 4 engine mounted alternators, and something called a synchronising busbar. Instead of the battery to provide emergency operation, both a Ram Air Turbine and Airbourne Auxiliary Power Plant were installed, the RAT being deployed by a handle on the pilots glareshield and the AAPP being operated from a small sub-panel at the AEO station. This made the whole thing quite a bit more robust and much less prone to an aircraft loss even if all engine-driven alternators went off.

    I don’t know much about the Victor 1’s, but I would think there were some similarities electrical system wise which were remedied in the Victor 2’s.

    in reply to: Red Flag Vulcans #1287221
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    XH558 never had the wrap scheme in normal RAF service. It ended it’s days as a K.2 tanker, and was then selected for the Vulcan flight and ‘de-converted’, at which point the glossy wrap scheme was applied for ease of maintenance etc… I’m sure many people closer to XH558 will comment in more detail.

    Cheers………;)

    .

    More appropriate for display, considering much of the said display is showing the underside to the display line (bomb doors opening etc) – much more aesthetic and easier to see/photo against the grim British overcast!

    in reply to: Red Flag Vulcans #1287339
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    The B.2’s tasked for the Falklands missions were actually repainted in Dark Sea Grey undersides as the wrap scheme wouldn’t have been of benefit for the medium level operation.

    There is a raft of info on-line and in print concerning the introduction of the wrap scheme.

    in reply to: Preserve, sink, paintball or scrap? #1246676
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    Yes, as a cockpit project, it looks like a good one. All the panels are there, and all the consoles. It even has a control column!

    If you have any doubts, look at Marks website – he had to cut his into many pieces!

    Bruce

    And my F.4 had been attacked with an angle grinder so huge parts of the internal structure, brackets, platforms etc had been cut out. You’d be hard pressed to tell now 😀 . Think empty cockpit shell, and you will have a pretty good idea of how mine was.

    For those of us who are dedicated in bringing our projects back from the dead, that cockpit is more complete than many offered in the past (apart from those who managed to acquire easy ‘clean up’ projects).

    I would have loved to purchase to go alongside my F.4, but I don’t have the luxury of £1600 to spare plus the costs of scrapping the fuse and clearing the site, and I note that no one else from the forum did either (where were all the ‘I’m interested in the Humbrol Hunter’ lot?). As a ‘spares donkey’ it would address many of the difficulties quite a number of us Hunter restorers are facing in getting parts – most of us are quite creative with restoring corroded parts and prefer original than locally made.

    At least this one is not being sunk to help pollute a lake somewhere. One can hope that when the owners have finished with it, then it may be made available for one of the Hunter fanatics to take on.

    in reply to: Hunter Line Up CockpitFest 2008 #1257136
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    So, in the words of Princess Leia “Help us Mark T, you’re our only hope”! (Sorry 😮 )

    If you were only as pretty as she :diablo:

    Still, now I have the ‘towing beast’, that’s one less huge hurdle to cross. At least I can get it up to Cocdkpitfest now 😀

    Note that Tony has me on the list – lots of work to do, but it gives me a goal to work to eh?

    MT

    in reply to: XH558 First Flight #1292220
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    As to the moaning minnies and highly tallented ******s and armchair experts out in “Flypast forum land” how is your historic aircraft coming along.

    mick

    Well said that man.

    in reply to: A Couple Of Vulcan Questions… #1297681
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    The Phase 2 Wing was introduced to counter the issues with high-speed buffet and the subsequent issues with fatigue of the wing structure. VX777 flew with the Phase 2 wing to prove its suitability. The improvement was embodied in many (most?) B.1’s and all B.2’s.

    It is a moot point as to whether the Vulcan was renamed as the HS Vulcan – it was always known within as the Avro Vulcan…

    in reply to: Bulldog XX672 #1307315
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    Seems a shame to life these and not a dodgy flying club C152.

    American Spam Cans do have life limitations based on hours. The Piper Terrorhawk for instance has lifed main spars which until fairly recently required the airframe to be scrapped.

    There is now a re-life kit available from the US which has now been granted CAA approval.

    in reply to: CockpitFest 2008 #1249644
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    Looks like I won’t have to bother then. :rolleyes:

    in reply to: CockpitFest 2008 #1252757
    vulcanpilot
    Participant

    If someone can give me a solid lead where I can hire a vehicle with a tow hitch in the Bristol/Taunton area, then I will be happy to bring the Hunter 4 cockpit along.

    Logistically my location precludes the use of a Luton type van with lift, so it can only go on a smallish trailer. I just don’t now have a car with a towbar and I have been told in no uncertain terms that the Beemer is not having its bumper cut and a £2k towbar fitted! :rolleyes:

    Mark T

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)