This one is way over due:eek: Please feel free to start a new thread folks.
Time to start a new thread folks!
Thread closed, please feel free to start a new one!
Time for a new thread folks!
Please start a new thread folks!
Time for a new thread!
Please continue with a new thread.
TKS, M’Pacha
20 pages are long gone, please feel free to continue on a new thread.
Thanks,
M’Pacha
Time to start a new thread folks!
During the time of “Rhodesia” No. 8 Squadron was indeed the sole user of the eleven Augusta-Bell 205A’s known locally as the Cheetah. No.7 Squadron of the “Zimbabwe” AF obtained the three sole surviving Augusta-Bell 205’s during 1983 when 8 Squadron was deactivated. They also operate the Augusta-Bell 412.
The first AB-205A lost was c/n 4049 during it’s test flight near Melsetter, 9th February 1979, after the tail rotor drive shaft failed. The second was c/n 4051 which was shot down in Mozambique on the 3rd September 1979. At least one was written off by the Zimbabwe AF on 14th March 1982. Serials 4035, 4039, 4042 and 4052 were sold to the South African company, HeliBase.
A bit more that I’ve managed to obtain on the original purchase. Rhodesia had hoped to obtain newly built Agusta-Bell’s from Italy as they had successfully aquired aircraft from Italy in the past. This was unsuccessful but they were put in contact with a US company which delt with surplus aircraft. They were marketing 40 ex-Israeli machines which were not airworthy but they agreed to have a number of them made airworthy. Due to the political situation Rhodesia could not send anyone to inspect these machines and they had to rely on an American engineer for this. When these aircraft arrived in Rhodesia they were found to be in a poor state with many more hours on the airframe than they were led to believe. This led to the rumour that it was a three way deal with Agusta supplying Israel with new built machines and Rhodesia getting the old ones from Israel.
The fact is that they were bought under conditions of extreme secrecy due to sanctions, thus many middle men were involved posing as who know’s. The true story will probably never be known but I doubt that any helicopters got “swapped”. I have no doubt that they were in a poorer state than advertised but such is the nature of the business. I believe that they were purchased by a “logging company” in Singapore but got off loaded in Durban (South Africa) instead.
From todays East Anglian Daily Times,the Sea King was from B Flight,22 Squadron,based at Wattisham.
Colin
“ZH540”
I do not believe that this is correct. I can find no record of a P-47 being registered to the SAAF. Certainly not 26 SQN who operated Lockheed Ventura’s and Vickers Wellington’s.
PeeDee
Mpacha
What do you mean airports take fuel from bowsers? Also airlines having de-fuel bowsers is slightly different to the refuellers de-fuelling the aeroplane. Smaller operators probably do reuse fuel de-fuelled, purely down to costs, and you even said it yourself, for light aircraft. We’re talking about an Airbus 319 here.
Dispatchers will keep one eye on the weather, but it’s still pretty irrelevant to their operation apart from “oh look, we cannot dispatch this a/c because the wx is below minima”. This would be a very, very rare occasion, and certainly wouldn’t warrant a dispatcher deciphering how much fuel a particular aircraft should take. (which is what the discussion was about)
The point I’m making as I said, there are various ways that airlines do things.
The topic being discussed was about the possibility of defueling, not that it had to be done by the refueller. Some airports do not refuel from ground tanks but still use bowsers.
Dispatchers would never dictate what fuel goes on board. They only create a fuel log which in most cases is merely a print-out from a service provider. That part we agree on 🙂
Interesting points.
Just a few corrections. Some airports do take fuel from bowsers. Some airlines do have defuel bowsers, especially if it is a maintenance base. And some smaller operators do re-use the fuel, which is tested for contamination prior to use. (Light aircraft) Most airlines I’ve worked for, the weather is relevant to a flight dispatcher and it is part of his/her daily tasks to monitor it.
My point is that one has so many variables, that to comment one really needs to study the facts for that particular airline/airport.