Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Mister Rog on 12 February 2020, 13:28:21
-
If you've got the space, here's a little bargain . .
FREE - BUYER COLLECTS (https://www.lynnnews.co.uk/news/raf-marham-jet-faces-the-scrap-unless-it-is-claimed-for-free-9099151/)
-
That would look good on the grass opposite...
You would have thought that someone would have bothered to carry out some form of preservation before parking it up :-\
After all, having been based there, if anyone knew how to, they would have...
-
The reason why it is being given away or scrapped is interesting.
The Valiant V Bomber, one of the famous three sisters in service in the 1950's as Britain Nuclear deterrent force (which I loved seeing flying around Fleet in Hampshire, and on the ground at the Farnborough Air Show in 1958) was actually grounded in 1964 due to severe metal fatigue as a result, I believe, of a miscalculation by the designers using the then advanced alloy metals used to build these aircraft.
The Vulcan's and Victors of course went on to fly in much later years as, apparently, they did not suffer from the same flaws as the Valiant did. But with this Gate Mascot Victor now being found to have major structural flaws, I wonder if finally the ignorance of using advanced materials that were not fully understood in the late 1940 / early 50's have now become apparent.
It does not matter now as all the V Bombers are well and truly grounded, but it is still interesting to understand if the trouble with the Gate Victor is due to metal fatigue, or simply corrosion due to sitting around so long without maintenance.
Anyone, like Shackeng, LC0112G, Entwood, or other aviation experts have any observations on this? ??? ??? ;)
-
Pah, a few lengths of 4x2 and some silicone would hold it together for a few more years! ::) :y
-
Pah, a few lengths of 4x2 and some silicone would hold it together for a few more years! ::) :y
That works for Airbus :D
-
Don't think it would fit on my trailer otherwise I'd have it for my retirement project..😀
-
Don't think it would fit on my trailer otherwise I'd have it for my retirement project..😀
Planning on taking my A License this year... That would do nicely for the OJT aspect... 8)
-
The reason why it is being given away or scrapped is interesting.
The Valiant V Bomber, one of the famous three sisters in service in the 1950's as Britain Nuclear deterrent force (which I loved seeing flying around Fleet in Hampshire, and on the ground at the Farnborough Air Show in 1958) was actually grounded in 1964 due to severe metal fatigue as a result, I believe, of a miscalculation by the designers using the then advanced alloy metals used to build these aircraft.
The Vulcan's and Victors of course went on to fly in much later years as, apparently, they did not suffer from the same flaws as the Valiant did. But with this Gate Mascot Victor now being found to have major structural flaws, I wonder if finally the ignorance of using advanced materials that were not fully understood in the late 1940 / early 50's have now become apparent.
It does not matter now as all the V Bombers are well and truly grounded, but it is still interesting to understand if the trouble with the Gate Victor is due to metal fatigue, or simply corrosion due to sitting around so long without maintenance.
Anyone, like Shackeng, LC0112G, Entwood, or other aviation experts have any observations on this? ??? ??? ;)
I thought the issue with the Valiant and, a lesser extent, the other V bombers, was that they were designed as high altitude aircraft but, by the time they entered service, the requirement had changed towards low altitude flight and the accelerated airframe fatigue was due to the more turbulent air at low level.
-
Lizzie ..... quite simple ..... MONEY
The cost of maintaining, surveying, insuring these old gate guards is tremendous ... anyone who has worked on / flown aircraft for a living knows that when unpressurised (ie on the gound) they leak like sieves .. the holes "seal up" as the pressurisation acts on the cabin areas then the air conditioning dries them.... the wing/engine areas (unpressurised) rely on frequent flying to adequately vent and dry the many cavities therein...
When they sit on the ground they fill with water and basically rot from the inside. Many of the "popular" gate guards .. spitfires etc are now actually plastic replicas for that reason.
Large beasts like the vulcan/victor/valiant are simply too expensive to keep or replace with plastic. RAF Lyneham (where I spent over 30 odd years) had a beautiful Comet as a gate guard for many years ... I was one of the volunteers who used to wash it every spring .. it's gone now, simply because bits started to fall off it in high winds due to nothing else than unseen corrosion.... :(
If you think how an Omega rots inside the cills, front chassis legs etc etc then multiply that by a few hundreds ...... the only "safe" relics are those kept inside in dry exhibition halls, anything outside has little chance.
edited for smelling pistakes ...
-
Aluminium and moisture really don't mix.
-
This particular aircraft - XH673 - was damaged beyond repair and struck off in July 1986. It's been on display at Marham since about 1993, but chances are it wasn't actually hangared between '86 and '93 (Victors are big buggas and hangar space is precious). It's had a few coats of paint since then, but likely no real maintainance. So it's spent the best part of 34 years outside in the weather and people are surprised it's falling apart?
Plenty of examples of gate guards being scrapped after much shorter stints 'on duty'. Many Vampires, Meteors and Javelins expired in the 70's. Phantoms & Lightnings in the 80/90's. I think "Black Mike" at Leuchars just about survived as does the Woodford Vulcan, but the Vulcan at Blackpool got the chop and there are supposedly problems with the ones at Waddington & Southend too.
-
Lizzie ..... quite simple ..... MONEY
The cost of maintaining, surveying, insuring these old gate guards is tremendous ... anyone who has worked on / flown aircraft for a living knows that when unpressurised (ie on the gound) they leak like sieves .. the holes "seal up" as the pressurisation acts on the cabin areas then the air conditioning dries them.... the wing/engine areas (unpressurised) rely on frequent flying to adequately vent and dry the many cavities therein...
When they sit on the ground they fill with water and basically rot from the inside. Many of the "popular" gate guards .. spitfires etc are now actually plastic replicas for that reason.
Large beasts like the vulcan/victor/valiant are simply too expensive to keep or replace with plastic. RAF Lyneham (where I spent over 30 odd years) had a beautiful Comet as a gate guard for many years ... I was one of the volunteers who used to wash it every spring .. it's gone now, simply because bits started to fall off it in high winds due to nothing else than unseen corrosion.... :(
If you think how an Omega rots inside the cills, front chassis legs etc etc then multiply that by a few hundreds ...... the only "safe" relics are those kept inside in dry exhibition halls, anything outside has little chance.
edited for smelling pistakes ...
Thanks for that Entwood, that is very interesting :y :y
Yes, like everything else, even when machines are first built, it comes down to money! ;)
-
This particular aircraft - XH673 - was damaged beyond repair and struck off in July 1986. It's been on display at Marham since about 1993, but chances are it wasn't actually hangared between '86 and '93 (Victors are big buggas and hangar space is precious). It's had a few coats of paint since then, but likely no real maintainance. So it's spent the best part of 34 years outside in the weather and people are surprised it's falling apart?
Plenty of examples of gate guards being scrapped after much shorter stints 'on duty'. Many Vampires, Meteors and Javelins expired in the 70's. Phantoms & Lightnings in the 80/90's. I think "Black Mike" at Leuchars just about survived as does the Woodford Vulcan, but the Vulcan at Blackpool got the chop and there are supposedly problems with the ones at Waddington & Southend too.
Thanks LC0112G :y :y
Yes, it is easy to forget how old these aircraft are. As I mentioned, I first saw the beauty of the three V Bomber versions at the Farnborough Air Show in 1958 - 1958, that is 62 years ago, which I can hardly believe!! :o :o :o So even with maintenance as serving front line aircraft they must have taken a hell of a lot of money and materials to keep them flying, and that is not even thinking about the engines, as the XH558 people found out. So as you say, as gate mascots, structural maintenance was not carried out, so it is no wonder I suppose that these 1950's aircraft are now falling apart. Like the 1940's aircraft that acted as gate mascots before, like the Spitfire and Hurricane at Biggin Hill, they may be replaced with fiberglass versions! But a full scale Victor in fibreglass would be bloody expensive! ::) ::) :P :P ;D ;D ;)
It is very sad to see them go :'( :'(
-
Aluminium and moisture really don't mix.
No, and that is certainly the weakness of all aircraft made of the stuff, even today - thinking of the Japanese 747 airliner that had it's rear pressure bulkhead fail after a previous poorly completed repair fail due to corrosion and fatigue, like some other airliners that have crashed suffered from. :'( :'(
-
That 747 failed because it only had a single line of rivets instead of two. This allowed fatigue to occur. Corrosion was an late addition to the party and bought on by fatigue.
That bulkhead seam was always going to fail.
Some aircraft only have a shelf life of a maximum of 20 years. The older stuff is less efficient because it weighs more.
We often have a discussion at work regarding Boeings decision to focus on the 737 as it's wonder child... The 757 reengined with LEAP units to replace the venerable RB211 would have offered another 30+ years without any trim issues. ::)
-
That 747 failed because it only had a single line of rivets instead of two. This allowed fatigue to occur. Corrosion was an late addition to the party and bought on by fatigue.
That bulkhead seam was always going to fail.
Some aircraft only have a shelf life of a maximum of 20 years. The older stuff is less efficient because it weighs more.
We often have a discussion at work regarding Boeings decision to focus on the 737 as it's wonder child... The 757 reengined with LEAP units to replace the venerable RB211 would have offered another 30+ years without any trim issues. ::)
Thanks for that info :y :y
I never knew about the 20 year shelf life. Glad I didn't when I used Dan Air in the 1980's that flew old aircraft!! :o :o :o
Is the shelf life and poor maintenance a factor in Aeroflot aircraft crashes that once were seemingly common? ??? ???
-
I remember when the current crop of 757s at Gatwick were new... '97/98, most of the older ones are either at Jet2 or DHL/FedEx etc and all still going strong.
The A319 is only good for about twenty years as they are relatively lightly built, although they're the same size, the landing weight of a 737 is higher than an A320 buy some margin.
Not that the Airbus is a bad aircraft, far from it, just that they took a different approach ;)
-
That 747 failed because it only had a single line of rivets instead of two. This allowed fatigue to occur. Corrosion was an late addition to the party and bought on by fatigue.
That bulkhead seam was always going to fail.
Some aircraft only have a shelf life of a maximum of 20 years. The older stuff is less efficient because it weighs more.
We often have a discussion at work regarding Boeings decision to focus on the 737 as it's wonder child... The 757 reengined with LEAP units to replace the venerable RB211 would have offered another 30+ years without any trim issues. ::)
Thanks for that info :y :y
I never knew about the 20 year shelf life. Glad I didn't when I used Dan Air in the 1980's that flew old aircraft!! :o :o :o
Is the shelf life and poor maintenance a factor in Aeroflot aircraft crashes that once were seemingly common? ??? ???
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Dan-Air_Boeing_707_crash.
The FE killed in this was the father of a Captain with BA. At one point not long after this in 1979 or ‘80 I found myself flying an early 707, G-AYSL, commonly known as ‘Spreadlegs’ as everyone had ‘had her’, under the British Airtours name which was leased from Dan-air who leased it from ‘who knows’.
This was back in the day when pax were invited to the flight deck. On one sector we had a plane spotting anorak visit. “Ah yes” sez he, “This was the airframe that Boeing used for all the high altitude stall tests.”
I was never keen on flight deck visitors after that. :-X
-
That 747 failed because it only had a single line of rivets instead of two. This allowed fatigue to occur. Corrosion was an late addition to the party and bought on by fatigue.
That bulkhead seam was always going to fail.
Some aircraft only have a shelf life of a maximum of 20 years. The older stuff is less efficient because it weighs more.
We often have a discussion at work regarding Boeings decision to focus on the 737 as it's wonder child... The 757 reengined with LEAP units to replace the venerable RB211 would have offered another 30+ years without any trim issues. ::)
Thanks for that info :y :y
I never knew about the 20 year shelf life. Glad I didn't when I used Dan Air in the 1980's that flew old aircraft!! :o :o :o
Is the shelf life and poor maintenance a factor in Aeroflot aircraft crashes that once were seemingly common? ??? ???
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Dan-Air_Boeing_707_crash.
The FE killed in this was the father of a Captain with BA. At one point not long after this in 1979 or ‘80 I found myself flying an early 707, G-AYSL, commonly known as ‘Spreadlegs’ as everyone had ‘had her’, under the British Airtours name which was leased from Dan-air who leased it from ‘who knows’.
This was back in the day when pax were invited to the flight deck. On one sector we had a plane spotting anorak visit. “Ah yes” sez he, “This was the airframe that Boeing used for all the high altitude stall tests.”
I was never keen on flight deck visitors after that. :-X
Wow!! :o :o :o
To think our family flew with Dan Air without any knowledge of all that. Again, thank goodness we didn’t! :P
-
We also flew with Dan Dare a couple of times in the early 90,s iirc.
-
Yeah, because they only two aircraft... ::)