Mon Jul 20, 2015 10:54 am
Mon Jul 20, 2015 12:21 pm
Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:08 pm
Mon Jul 20, 2015 2:08 pm
Mon Jul 20, 2015 2:44 pm
Pat Carry wrote:Why is it being grounded?
Mon Jul 20, 2015 2:50 pm
TBDude wrote:Pat Carry wrote:Why is it being grounded?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(or, more accurately, ££££££££££££££££££££)
Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:14 pm
Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:52 pm
marine air wrote:Maybe they can find a way to get it airborne again in a few years.
Mon Jul 20, 2015 5:35 pm
quemerford wrote:TBDude wrote:Pat Carry wrote:Why is it being grounded?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(or, more accurately, ££££££££££££££££££££)
Not quite: UK CAA requires aircraft in the 'complex' category to have Design Authority support: in this case BAe for airframe and Rolls-Royce for engines. These companies can no longer provide DA support.
In theory however, it could fly on other registries e.g. under the US Experimental category.
Mon Jul 20, 2015 5:50 pm
Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:11 pm
Tue Jul 21, 2015 2:18 am
quemerford wrote:UK CAA requires aircraft in the 'complex' category to have Design Authority support: in this case BAe for airframe and Rolls-Royce for engines.
Tue Jul 21, 2015 7:08 am
TBDude wrote:quemerford wrote:UK CAA requires aircraft in the 'complex' category to have Design Authority support: in this case BAe for airframe and Rolls-Royce for engines.
Very interesting.
I briefly wondered how so many types from defunct companies could still be flying until I realized you specified the "complex" category. I suppose privately operated warbirds don't get too much more complex than a Vulcan!
Tue Jul 21, 2015 9:02 am
marine air wrote:Beautifully flown. I hope he doesn't hit the ground before it's all over.
Fri Jul 24, 2015 9:47 am