XH558...

[jmorgan]

SydneyBridge said:

I am going to Weston Super Mare on sunday and she will be flying with 2 Hunters

http://www.classicjets.co.uk/news.htm

Flying out of St Athan...... els bells..... damn and blast...... won't be able to get near it.

[aeropilot]

ChemicalChaos said:

So what is the betting on the rumours that she'll go out in style by repeating Farnborough 55?

Anyone that thinks that there is any possibility of that happening needs to have their head examined.

[jmorgan]

To be honest, and not knowing what I should, what are the regs? To the lay person this seems like a thing that could happen.

[Eric Mc]

It's not so much "the regs" (although there are some specified for airshows by the CAA) but, at Farnborough in particular, there is an "Airshow Committee" who review the planned manoeuvers to be displayed by each aircraft and will also review a demonstration display before airshow week.

If they don't like a particular manoeuver or routine, they will not allow it to be performed, or ask it to be modified in such a way that it reduces exposure to risk.

[jmorgan]

I was thinking more of why would a pilot lose his/her licence. I know nothing of these things and of course the capabilities of the flying thingamabob that might attempt something.

[Eric Mc]

I don't think he necessarily would - although he might find his reputation (and future job prospects) dented somewhat.

[aeropilot]

jmorgan said:

I was thinking more of why would a pilot lose his/her licence.

In the same way that a driver would expect to loose his car licence for being caught doing 160mph on the M25.....there are rules for the air just like rules for the road.

[Eric Mc]

But is there a specific rule at the CAA that says "thou shalt not roll a Vulcan"? I doubt it. However, there will be limits put on the display by those who own the aircraft and , as I mentioned, by those who organise the airshow.

[aeropilot]

Eric Mc said:

But is there a specific rule at the CAA that says "thou shalt not roll a Vulcan"? I doubt it.

The displays rules for the Vulcan will be an adaptation of the in-service RAF display rules with adaptions with regard to the current criteria for FI and engines limits - so anything that was against the rules of an RAF display when in service will certainly be against the rules today - and a roll was definitely against RAF display rules (it was done at least once though, but not intentionally - although it was more of a 'get out of jail' - Derry turn to avoid a smoking hole in the ground, not a Falk style barrel roll)

[Eric Mc]

So - not a "law" under which someone could be prosecuted as such but a set of limits.

Which is fine. I have no particular desire to see a Vulcan rolled to be honest. I just want her to get through her last display season in one piece and retired whole.

[aeropilot]

Eric Mc said:

So - not a "law" under which someone could be prosecuted as such but a set of limits.

I'd say there's more than enough 'laws' under which the CAA can prosecute a pilot under should they wish to.

[Eric Mc]

It was the equating of such a "stunt" with a Road Traffic Act violation (i.e. speeding) - which could involve a fine or even a jail sentence - that I didn't think was appropriate.

I didn't think that rolling a Vulcan would be treated in quite the same way - although the professional career of the pilot would be seriously damaged.

[V8LM]

I understand XH558 is not certified for aerobatics. When asked what this meant, basically any manouver where the wings cross the vertical. I don't know whether knowingly flying an aircraft outside of its certification would result in loss of licence.

[aeropilot]

Eric Mc said:

It was the equating of such a "stunt" with a Road Traffic Act violation (i.e. speeding) - which could involve a fine or even a jail sentence - that I didn't think was appropriate.

I didn't think that rolling a Vulcan would be treated in quite the same way - although the professional career of the pilot would be seriously damaged.

If anything, my comparison was more flippant in that the penalties under RTA are less severe that for a pilot transgressing Aviation Law - which is why it's such a rare event, unlike violating RTA.

[spitfire-ian]

V8LM said:

I understand XH558 is not certified for aerobatics. When asked what this meant, basically any manouver where the wings cross the vertical. I don't know whether knowingly flying an aircraft outside of its certification would result in loss of licence.

Not true

20140821_DSC_2266 by Ian, on Flickr

[Eric Mc]

aeropilot said:

If anything, my comparison was more flippant in that the penalties under RTA are less severe that for a pilot transgressing Aviation Law - which is why it's such a rare event, unlike violating RTA.

And would rolling the Vulcan transgress an aviation law i.e a law set out in a legal statute by Parliament?

[aeropilot]

spitfire-ian said:

V8LM said:

I understand XH558 is not certified for aerobatics. When asked what this meant, basically any manouver where the wings cross the vertical. I don't know whether knowingly flying an aircraft outside of its certification would result in loss of licence.

Not true

20140821_DSC_2266 by Ian, on Flickr

Yup, up to 110 deg of bank is allowed.

[aeropilot]

Eric Mc said:

aeropilot said:

If anything, my comparison was more flippant in that the penalties under RTA are less severe that for a pilot transgressing Aviation Law - which is why it's such a rare event, unlike violating RTA.

And would rolling the Vulcan transgress an aviation law i.e a law set out in a legal statute by Parliament?

I suspect you would need to be conversant with the intimate details of the Air Navigation Orders contained within CAP 393 - but I would think it likely yes.

[Eric Mc]

I would guess that it would be very open to interpretation by whoever decided to bring a case against the pilot. Speeding is fairly clear cut. Transgressing whilst conducting an aerobatic manoeuver at an airshow would be a bit less clear cut I would think.

[Hooli]

aeropilot said:

spitfire-ian said:

V8LM said:

I understand XH558 is not certified for aerobatics. When asked what this meant, basically any manouver where the wings cross the vertical. I don't know whether knowingly flying an aircraft outside of its certification would result in loss of licence.

Not true

20140821_DSC_2266 by Ian, on Flickr

Yup, up to 110 deg of bank is allowed.

Isn't it more to do with no neg G? as she has gravity fed plumbing for fuel (tank pickups?). Barrel roll sorts that as proved in '55.