Canopener AlI recall the higher cost of the M being cited as a main issue, with sub-optimal handling of the M at lower carrier approach speeds also an issue. The M had slow throttle response and marginal power reserves (common to most/all Jaguars) sub-optimal handling issues around the boat and poor single engine characteristics around the boat (but obviously better than engine out characteristics of the Etendard IV or Super Entendard :D). Fixing these issues would have taken time and money, and Dassault came up with a lower risk and cheaper plan to warm over the Entendard IV into what became the Super Entendard. With a supposedly cheaper selection they could buy more airframes. I imagine the M could have been made to work off the carrier, but again it would have taken time and money, which the Air Force and Navy did not have in excess with several aircraft programs underway.
Perhaps jobs/work share would also be an unstated issue as well. A Dassault product would have a higher French made content (more jobs)
Perhaps Dassaults sales pitch was not unlike the Super Hornet, which was touted as lower risk upgrade which sounds great to the bean counters, but in reality is a significantly different aircraft.
The 50 Jaguar M aircraft were part of the the 400 aircraft joint order from the UK/French governments.. They got built as As instead. The M was rubbish off a Carrier.
Canopener AlGot some more systems working on XX741. Our troublesome undercarriage doors was down to a circuit breaaker having a resistance of 114 ohms through it. Change of CB and the doors started to work. Nosewheel steering also made to work as far as the mechanism not connected to the nose wheel. Video of course.
Canopener AlIt was the second CWJ day I have been to, but the first where I had been purely up to Bruntingthorpe to watch and not involved with trying to fix something or sort items out for XX741. Tony has good points about the entry from the static line to the runway (people pushing in to get the shot) and the embankment. But of course it is the type of event where some people struggle to show any common sense (perhaps me included as I never put the deffs on once, I’m a professional LAE and always do at work!) Some teams did show up better than others, because those that know the set up there know it is a wide range of different people that own and maintain the runners. One hopes that ZA326 will become an active runner sooner that later, of course the frame needs certain major components to be sourced and that a certain other ripple project may pickup again. Of course there is also the F4, but that is a long way in the future. One of my favourite shots, of the team there that I have the most contact with.. Victor Sim flat packing some TBAGers.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]246261[/ATTACH]
The large model association displays were brilliant as well as Millies low flypasts.
Canopener AlThe big day arrived yesterday with the return of 80-0219 to Bentwaters. Causing a traffic jam down the A14 (picture credit. Simon Parker)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]246163[/ATTACH]
Parked up it the BCWM complex, where rebuilt and repaint will commence. Brilliant effort by Jon Saunders in the donkey work involved in securing it and the guys who prepared it for the road move. Such a move is not cheap. (picture credit. Graham Gilbert)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]246164[/ATTACH]
Canopener AlOnly if the investigation turns out to show technical malfunction on the part of the aircraft. If it is deemed pilot error as the cause then it would be the pilot who did it, using the aircraft as an instrument.
T J
Correct.
Canopener AlPaul (178),
You don’t happen to write for one or more of the national papers do you?
I say that, because you seem to spurting out the same sort of rubbish and misinformation (are you really an aviation enthusiast?) that they and the rest of the media have been ever since the Shoreham tragedy.
Whatever way you look at it, it was a tragic accident in which 11 people sadly lost their lives. But I think you’ll find it was the aircraft in which Andy Hill was piloting killed these people, and not him.
I often think of how the media would be reporting the accident if it had happened over the airfield instead, but with no casualties.
I’m sure we would be seeing no end of stories and replays on how the pilot had ‘miraculously survived’ what looked like an ‘unsurvivable’ accident, and no doubt many clips of it on those ‘Narrow Escape/Shocking Moments’ type reality programmes, and everyone banging on what a lucky guy he was.
But that’s the media for you.
Cheers
Paul
The Hunter airframe is an inanimate object, a collection of metal and polymer pieces, unless a human being operates it into life. it did not kill 11 people, the persons that flew it and maintained it led to the accident that ended up with 11 people being killed. Buffet stalling in the video may give the game away on the reason. Basic PART 66 course on aerodynamics would tell you why.. LAE holder has to pass that. Roll on the report. At least it will have all views to draw an accurate picture from..
Canopener AlIndeed, and also until recently, the wonderful displays of the F-86 over the years by another well known ‘over 50’ 🙂
However, both those pilots also had extensive fast jet RN and RAF service experience behind them as well as extensive multi-type vintage display flying time.
Agreed, I know a certain civilian Spitfire display pilot, who was display practicing in front of me last week. A colleague next to me mentioned it was being flown by some one else. I said it was being flown by my friend in question. The flying was so smooth and precise, obviously an expert flying the aircraft.. Of course he was as he is one of the guys with the highest number of hours on Spits in the last few years, with lots of hours of single seat FJs (STANEVAL for a certain fleet) and did two display pilot tours, one being on the RAFAT.. No prizes for the name.
Canopener AlWho knows, my only thoughts and I will probably be howled down for it is this crash a pilot without proper training in fast jets and I wonder why the RAF did not transition him onto them. Shoreham again another pilot who thought he was better than he was. Andy Hill was 50 when 11 people died as a result of this,do the RAF have any fast jet pilots still flying them at this age? No if not I wonder why not?
Nothing to do with the military or age. These are civil aircraft being flown by civilian pilots. Andy Hills day job is airliners, however anyone that knows airliners is that the autopilot system is used straight after take off and disconnected just before landing, if at all, depending on the type (twist and sync). Kevin wasn’t even a professional pilot as his day job, it was hobby flying. I am not questioning their skill set, they were and are both highly competent pilots to get their DAs issued, however everyone makes mistakes and they both failed to recognise inital errors with incorrect actions, certainly in my book due to the reasons the AAIB mentioned in the later. The RAF would never allow low level display pilots to be authorised without a much larger time on type..
Canopener AlReally?!
plus everything else already dragged up of course. Experience and currency were always major factors likely to be mentioned by the AAIB in this accident. It is surprising the CAA were so relaxed on the requirements, however it is more a case that they did not have the staff with the time to ensure strong safe guards are in place, until this and Shoreham happened. They will be stronger now.
Canopener AlOne might now suspect that the Shoreham report may sound similar, for the same reasons.
Canopener AlI spoke to a pilot I know, whom knew Kev on the day of the accident. AAIB have said exactly the same as he said that day.
Canopener AlHopefully as many folk’s as possible can back this project.. Who knows.. one day might she grace the UK sky???????
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/xs422/xs422-restoration
Not a chance..
Canopener AlBeen a bit quiet on the forum recently. We still have issues with XX741’s undercarriage door opening operation. Possible plug insulation breakdown that is proving a pain in the butt to find. However, other work completed has seen the fwd avionic bay door properly fitted.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]245468[/ATTACH]
A glazing being found for the chisel nose faring, a perspex mirror copy being made and both fitted to the chisel nose.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]245469[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]245470[/ATTACH]
Spine auto stab wiring that was still disconnected identified and reattached (or bust plugs being replaced by splicing in, naughty, but crimps are proper aerospace ones). Oh the jacks have been assembled as well, however the mains are being used at the moment on our Lightning to sort out its undercarriage! Very useful they have already proved to be!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]245471[/ATTACH]
Canopener Al[QUOT
She hasn’t been moved yet. Prep work to do so is well underway. The A10 is not my project and I have not been able to get the spare time to help out, but things are progressing.
Canopener Al. Children need close supervision to save themselves and others from harm, competent adults need only to be guided.
AAIB seem to be picking that argument apart as far as Shoreham is concerned. Maintenance and operational holes seem to have appeared without much digging. Wouldn’t be surprised if Oulton Park was similar. “Regulations are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men” is a statement that I hate hearing as an aviation professional, certainly as an engineer, deviation in maintenance because one feels like it, is “a violation”.
Sign In
