Jump to content

tweeky

Members
  • Posts

    520
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tweeky

  1. John these are the Bruntingthorpe F6's from talking to the guys that run them the U/c bays have a good coating of wax oil or the like so that's not representative of how the jets were in-service. I'm in work at the moment and will try to dig my photos out this afternoon.
  2. The AD grey jets undercarriage bays were silver and got a tad dirty. The gear and the bays never got painted. Looks like the pilot's name is Tim Brunskill or ET as he was know on the Sqn.
  3. Isn't a grey jet and the undercarriage on the P1 is different to the in service Lightning.
  4. I know the CF18's have a clear panel in the nose, it contains a light for visual identification, wonder if it the same reasoning ?
  5. this is how the Lightning Jockeys rocked up to the jets. PEC was on the right tho.
  6. Lower legs look wrong the G-suite/Immersion suite went over the boots.
  7. Lovely build David. its part of the inter/reheat pipe bay drain system. The Brake chute release was at the top of the rear Fuselage just below the rudder. As for repacking it that was done away from the Aircraft, they were dried first other wise they froze at altitude. Fitted many chutes.
  8. In fuel range the F2a was better than the F6 but all the Lightning at Binbrook had IFR probes so they could catch a tanker if there was one out there. The F2a's armament was limited to the cannon and Firestreak missile only, where as the F6 had the Aden cannon, the Firestreak as well as the "all aspect (well for its time)" Redtop missile and the better radar married to the that missile. But there again the expected mission profile was different between the two version F2a was low level interception, the F6's was uk air defence Later in the F6's service life there was a mod that gave the Lightning a slight lookdown capability.
  9. Yeah looks like it but from my time on the Lightning the T birds didn't have gun's.... compare that photo to a F1 or a F2a with lower guns and they look different.
  10. David, Its a trainer, not just to convert pilots into flying it but also as a weapons platform trainer, it needs mimic the single seater so the systems need to be the same. I'm not convinced the T4 or T5 were able to be equipped with guns. The F3's we had had the same armament selector as the F6, but the F3s never had guns.
  11. same dark panel but no guns.
  12. The rear fairing of the Firestreak missile Rail/Launcher contained a cooling bottle, this bottle contained liquid Ammonia. The rear fairing was something that was fitted during morning servicing and removed before the Jets went away for the night. When live arming the aircraft the missiles were delivered without the Ammonia bottle fairing thid was fitted once the missile was fitted. During day to day ops it wasn't uncommon to have a jet come back with an Ammonia leak, boy the smell was overpowering, breathing apparatus was needed to remove the leaking bottle
  13. Bob Barcilon went on to be Station Commander at RAF Binbrook in the early to mid 80's
  14. Ive coppied the pic youve linked and zoomed in on the weapons pack/ front fuslarge and id say no guns, carnt see any vents to allow the cannon gasses out of the weapons pack or any acces panels to arm,load,unload or remove the guns.
  15. have a look here scrole down the specs. just ignore the rocket pack as the RAF didnt have it. I've never seen a T4/5 with cannons. The panel you've mentioned is a removable one its not a structural panel.
  16. T4/5 never had cannons. F2A could have upper and lower cannons, the lower cannons were in a pack that replaced the missile pack. F2A's mission profile was boarder patrol so the ventral was purley fuel Dont think they were wired for the cannon pack. The document with the four (inc a recci pack) different packs on it is for the Export single seat F53 note the bomb on the wing. The RAF never had the rocket packs, the Lightnings role was Air defence/interception never ground attack/recci.
  17. As Selwin says the pylon is an integral part of the missile pack. The missile pack was removable as a a complete unit (various electrical and Hydrualic conections) and sent to a weapons bay for servicings. The fairing that was fitted when the missiles were removed were called slippers.
  18. Only had fire extingushers in the engine bays, nothing in the inter and Reheat bays..... would never be designed in this way today.
  19. Sorry but your wrong 5 Sqn was designated a fighter Sqn when operating Lightning and Tornados. When the re-equipped with the Sentinel they were designated with the AC designation. I was on 5F at Binbrook and have the Sqn badge with the F on it. Mark
  20. 5F sqn were never at Leeming it was 11F, 23F and 25F
  21. I was a Engine Mech at Binbrook, so never got to reheat run the beast just sit on the tail watching the main reheat fuel hose go from flexi to solid once fuel started to flow.
  22. Firstly your question, The "Exhaust/vent" you ask about is it an open aerofoilish shaped tube with a small angled plate on the end of it ? if this is it then its an attempt at draining the No2 engine bay should a leak happen being fuel, Engine and or Hyd oil. the idea being the angles plate at the end of the tube crates a vacuum thus sucking the "fluid" out, the idea of it being around 6-8 inches long is is far enough outboard not to be re-ingested into Zone 3 or the inter/reheat pipe bay (no extinguishes in there as you know). All part of the fire integrity program. Hope this helps As for the dashed lines around the rear fuselage, yes we used to trestle the rear end when the radar bullet was removed. The reason the dashes extend up the rear fuselage is originally the idea was the tether the rear end to the ground during reheat runs, but the powers to be realised that amount of power and holding it down might stress the back end so the procedure was abandoned, think its still in the AP is somebody has them. Tweeky (Mark)
×
×
  • Create New...