A few basics.. I am an LAE working for an airline, so do have a little knowledge on Air legislation.

If you wish to take passengers paying full fare as revenue service, you need an Air Operators Certificate. The regulations and requirements to get that since the early 2000’s are EU driven if your aircraft is over 5700 Kgs maximum take off mass. The Air Navigation Order has been amended to match the EU regulations on this. EU regulations also now apply to passenger aircraft at 2350 Kgs MTOM as well now. That is outside of the day job knowledge but would be fairly similar.

Non EASA regulated civil frames come under the British Civil Aviation Regulations (BCAR’s). These cover the ex military war birds and jets. If you have a Spitfire etc. That is a simple complexity airframe. No OEM requirements for support however the maintenance schedule must be no less restrictive that the basic requirements of LAMS. The CAA decide on the level required to award the PtF (annual and case by case basis). Hunters, Canberras, Se Vixens etc, are intermediate. They have higher performance and more complex systems such as hydraulically ASSISTED controls. However the aircraft have manual reversion of these controls. The terms of the PtF are more restrictive to maintenance and operating conditions.

If you have a frame that has thrust augmentation (reheat), auto stabilisation or autopilot and fully powered flying controls with no manual reversion, the frame is classed as complex requiring OEM oversight, fairly rigid maintenance and operations structures similar to in service and also the CAA will investigate the technical safety record of the aircraft in military service prior to awarding the PtF. The Lightning had an awfully high accident ratio due to technical failures. The CAA know that. The Vulcan proved it could be done and the Swedish Historical Flight dispel “the reheat is banned in private aircraft in the UK sketch”. SAAB still act as OEM for the SHF Viggen and Draken. 😀

Looks like the terms of reference they will be using to carry out the review.

Well I guess so!
I watched the video and had no idea where it was filmed and was 10x more interested in the setting/hardware than the track.
Once I saw the tail reg, I did a quick google and found only a couple of comments about her. I commented on FighterControl.co.uk where they were talking about her also – but nobody seemed to care… 🙁

I’ve no knowledge of the Harrier, but they’ve changed several of the features haven’t they?
From what I’ve spotted, the clearest thing is obviously the refuelling probe and the new nose.

There’s also a fin missing from the back of cockpit (could be the angle) and a small probe from the front of the cockpit.

Do these guys just smarten them up to sell on?

Yes they do. http://www.everettaero.com/

And what about the ones who don’t??

If it is a question of making money; Bruntingthorpe and Finningley are only about 90 miles apart which I would not regard as any meaningful distance. The truth is that the income from a few aviation photograhy enthusiasts a couple of times a year isn’t going to provide the funds to keep 558 in existence (let alone maintained in good running condition). As with the last 8 years, most of that money will have to be sourced by other means.

Fact is – Bruntihgthorpe doesn’t offer a long term future for 558, and it would be unlikely that the long term educational commitment that was an integral part of the contract for the lottery grant would be able to be fulfilled.

I don’t think it matters ajot what happens to 558 or where it resides; the same voices will continue to vociferously denounce and deride anything to do with any aspect of the future for XH558 regardless, with the same old tired arguments. I have no doubt they will continue to do so until their dying day.

I so agree.

Probably how all disputes should be settled,

Rock, paper, scissors!

I like that mate!

Interesting to see the tail surfaces working in opposition to each other. Do any other aircraft
have this feature ?

Tornado and any other aircraft that has differential moving tailplane halves. With Tornado, it was the primary roll control surface, complimented by roll spoilers with the wings extended at low speeds. Those spoilers could also act as lift dumpers on Landing. However with the Jaguar, it was a secondary roll control agent, supplementing the roll spoilers (that were purely that) for speeds up to 400 knots and progressively taken out of operation above 300 Knots. Roll spoilers were found not to work well at all at higher Alpha and low speeds, not enough authority.

Still owned by the MoD I think you will find. I cannot see it going anywhere.