WL747The Tornados went in against the most highly defended sites the Iraqi’s had – losses were inevitable, if in some cases, avoidable.
The Tornado was, and possibly still is, the best low level interdictor in the world. It’ll get you in, under the radar, low and fast, but once over a large flat airfield, a simple SAM has enough time to get lock and do its job.
How many Jags did we loose BTW ? 😉
Ummmm, I’m thinking Buccaneer here… I note we didn’t lose any of them, nor does the list in TEEJ’s post say any were damaged. However, there are a couple of Jags mentioned, albeit FAF examples.
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747One of those yokes looks familiar….
Looking very good, well done to all involved!
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747I thought the aerials left when the USN did – there was motorbike racing and stock cars on the runways for a while after the closure….
WL747That sounds really good of Scotty, a Shack yoke must be a difficult item to let go of.
Nice to know that work on VP293 is progressing well.:)
Not as hard to let go of as it was to find!!! Took me a good few years. But glad it went to a good home. Even better, it looks as though the yoke was a MK 1 item….
There was a genuine need for it with VP293 so it wasn’t a hard decision.
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747Never mind the Fray Bentos pies- we’d better start stocking up on Coffee Then- we’re gonna need it:diablo::diablo:
Fray Bentos are owned by Baxters Food group who in turn are based in Fochabers – not that far away from Lossiemouth and Kinloss…
WL747That would make some sense, with Lossie due to be the only northern QRA and JSF base, and Kinloss shut & Leauchars to close diversions wil have to be to civil airports.
You would think the RAF would foot the bill for the result of closing airfields and the need for civil training in dealing with their emergencies though.
Not sure that Cardiff does this specific training and it handles diversions in Wales and west region.
It seems the Jag is on some sort of standing away from the fire pit. It’s a bit close to the fence as well…. I sometimes have to do fire training at Aberdeen airport, and it doesn’t look as though this one is going to be burnt… But stranger things have happened…. The stand it is on almost looks as though it’s on display!
WL747On its way
Rich, you have a PM.
Original Yoke on its way. Maybe if Santa gets his skates on you’ll have it for Christmas.
Another Shack bit leaves Scotland. Shame there is not an airframe here, as they are just as relevant if not more than Cornwall having served in Morayshire for 40 years….
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747Couldn’t agree more. The 61 was like settling into grandads old armchair !! A bit slower, but I would trade an extra 20 mins flight time for the comfort. Plenty of room even when trussed up in survival suit. lifejacket and rebreather, as opposed to the Puma / Tiger / 225 series that leaves you with a good idea of what a sardine feels like !!
The 61 although in dwindling numbers nowadays has been a workhorse of the North Sea for 30 years plus and would fully justify is place at near the top of the civil list for the second half of the 20th century in North East aviation.
I’ve not seen a 61 in the air above NE Scotland for some time…. The last one I seen on the ground was beside the Bristows Hangars, all broken down as if for spares recovery or transportation. No rotors, gearbox, engines or sponsons.
I guess the coastguard ones were the last regularly operated ones before being replaced by the S92?
Yes, the old 61 was a comfy beast to fly in, and a lot more stable in a ditching situation. Not like the Puma / Tiger. The new 92’s are comfy too, but I’d still rather take my chance with a 61.
As for the EC225? The seats are even narrower than the Puma. Not good for a 2 hr flight with a full chopper.
Kind Regards
Scotty
WL747Forgetting the rotary ?
I know the initial post did suggest various civil helicopters and other posts have hinted on the Viscount, HS748 and Dash 7 in the oil support roles, but how about being a bit more specific – the Sikorski S61N?
These are pretty much extinct in Aberdeen nowadays, a far call from the days when the sky was full of them. Probably the most comfortable chopper I’ve been offshore in.
Also rapidly decreasing in number over the skies of Aberdeenshire is the AS.332L Puma, being edged out in favour of the newer EC225 – probably the most uncomfortable chopper I’ve been offshore in.
Lets also not forget the Bell 212, 214, 412, whose noise advertised their arrival long before you could see them, and the BV234 Chinook, unfortunately better known for the loss of G-BWFC in 1986.
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747I’ve not forgotten….
Rich,
I’ve not forgotten the other yoke…. I’m still bouncing about on a boat in the North Sea between 10m waves. Should be in port and home in the next week, and I’ll deal with it then.
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747Indeed the title of the programme concerned was Perpetual Motion, I’ve a digital copy of this, but it was converted from VCR and not all of it made the conversion.
WL798 was still substantially complete whilst I was at Lossie for a week long visit to 8 Sqn in Jan 1990. However, 3 months later I do believe WL738 (the gate guard) and WL798 got the chop, moving to Williamsons scrapyard in Elgin.
The programme IIRC does not focus on WL756, all filming of the Shack in the programme was at Lossie, no sign of St. Mawgan I think.
I have seen reports of WL798’s nose surviving, but to be honest, if you see the way it is getting hacked to death by a JCB in Perpetual Motion, I don’t think there was any attempt at salvage at all.
Hope this helps,
Scotty
WL747An uncomfortable truth?
But can compensation for the victims be limited?
Yes, there is an element of risk that there will be an accident at an air-race, especially with older aircraft. But to be realistic, I don’t think anybody there would have been less than professional with the operation and maintenance of the airframes involved in such an activity.
It is quite obvious when going to a race that people are going to be pushing their skill and the machine’s performance to the limit, and therefore, perhaps people should realise that things might go wrong – it is part of this risk that makes the whole spectacle of air racing exciting!
I don’t know a lot about air racing, but surely organisers had a safety meeting where hazards were thought about and mitigation put in place. But not all hazards can be totally eliminated, and to be honest, I don’t think they should be – for example, F1 motorsport would become (more) boring if there was no risk, therfore no overtaking or accident.
Following that idea (and in theory!) should not the compensation be limited as the victim actually put himself in a place where there was a risk of something going bad ? I mean, who wants to go to a race where competitors are not pushing the limits to achieve the best result?
I think it is sad that people died, but in life, can we really hold everybody else responsible, when at the heart of it, we could share a little bit of the culpablility ourselves by attending that event?
Something maybe to consider, and is relevant to a Historic Aviation forum. I am sure others can put my idea more eloquently, but I hope the gist can be recognised…
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747An uncomfortable truth?
But can compensation for the victims be limited?
Yes, there is an element of risk that there will be an accident at an air-race, especially with older aircraft. But to be realistic, I don’t think anybody there would have been less than professional with the operation and maintenance of the airframes involved in such an activity.
It is quite obvious when going to a race that people are going to be pushing their skill and the machine’s performance to the limit, and therefore, perhaps people should realise that things might go wrong – it is part of this risk that makes the whole spectacle of air racing exciting!
I don’t know a lot about air racing, but surely organisers had a safety meeting where hazards were thought about and mitigation put in place. But not all hazards can be totally eliminated, and to be honest, I don’t think they should be – for example, F1 motorsport would become (more) boring if there was no risk, therfore no overtaking or accident.
Following that idea (and in theory!) should not the compensation be limited as the victim actually put himself in a place where there was a risk of something going bad ? I mean, who wants to go to a race where competitors are not pushing the limits to achieve the best result?
I think it is sad that people died, but in life, can we really hold everybody else responsible, when at the heart of it, we could share a little bit of the culpablility ourselves by attending that event?
Something maybe to consider, and is relevant to a Historic Aviation forum. I am sure others can put my idea more eloquently, but I hope the gist can be recognised…
Kind Regards,
Scotty
WL747Did they retrieve the bodies of those who died after the crash I wonder? If not, it is bound to contain the human remains.
Anon.
Judging by the amount of natural light in the video, I wouldn’t have thought it would have been hard for divers to get that deep to recover bodies…
Kind Rgds
Scotty
WL747Did they retrieve the bodies of those who died after the crash I wonder? If not, it is bound to contain the human remains.
Anon.
Judging by the amount of natural light in the video, I wouldn’t have thought it would have been hard for divers to get that deep to recover bodies…
Kind Rgds
Scotty
Sign In
