Warbird Information Exchange

Awesome!

It's got a few more chances of spirited performances: I think we're expecting something even more impressive on the next few weeks...

Why is it being grounded?

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

(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.

Beautifully flown. I hope he doesn't hit the ground before it's all over. Maybe they can find a way to get it airborne again in a few years.

No chance of that happening.

This time, when she makes her final landing it will be the final landing.

This.....

And the above was explained to me at Geneseo this year by Art Nalls crew chief, and why they can fly the Sea Harrier in the US but wouldn't be allowed to fly in the UK at all. So even if someone like Richard Branson wanted to dump millions into keeping the Vulcan flying, and hired ex maintenance crew and engineers, the UK CAA would still say no. You need the manufacturer's support.

So Art's crew chief said they'd love to fly a show in Britain (no more Harriers in the UK) but BAE and RR want nothing to do with them. Kind of a weird paradox. The MOD will sell you a Harrier, Tornado, Vulcan but want nothing to do with it and don't care what's done outside the country. The US will let you own and fly your own Harrier/Fighter Jet, but our military cuts everything up into beer cans.

The reason the UK entities will not provide support for the Sea Harrier in the UK is because of various unapproved mods such as the gear blow-down system and non- standard ejection seat. As they have not approved these mods, they will not provide the necessary support for its operation in the UK, therefore the CAA will not agree to it being operated in the UK.

In reality, R-R and BAES have refused to support even a standard Harrier being operated in the UK due to its poor safety record in service. The same goes for the Lightning.

Yes I think this was more than just a 'wing over' !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xmrxz1zjoow

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!

Great video. I wish I'd been able to get over there to see her fly in person.

Covered under CAA CAP632 (Operation of 'Permit-to-Fly' ex-military aircraft on the UK register):

* Simple: single piston engine types.

* Intermediate: multiple piston engine or turbine (single or multiple) engine types with simple mechanical flying controls or with power controls having an independent back-up system which ensures continued safe flight.

* Complex: all other types, in particular those types having features which require a high degree of specialised knowledge and equipment to maintain (e.g. types with no independent backup system to powered flying controls or with auto-stabilisation systems or electronic engine controls).

I think there's a separate reference to Design Authority support being required for Complex aircraft. But it is indeed why no Lightnings fly in the UK, or Harriers, Buccaneers etc. I suspect the same may also apply to the Tucano, but strangely, not the Hunter, Gnat or F-86A. The latter do feature manual primary flying controls to an extent, and last time I checked, the F-86E/F fell into the 'Complex' category for the reason that these variants don't.

However, since the F-86E/F does have a battery-powered backup hyd pump, I do wonder if there's room for some discussion with the CAA?

In thrust we trust!

Was this Vulcan ever in the US? Seems I remember one at a Scott AFB airshow many moons ago.....Thanks, John