Farewell to the Tornado tour 19-21 Feb 19

Glued to my work screen (and doing no work ...) watching them up the Northumberland coast. Sadly grey and overcast here, so even if they do come down from 24,000ft to overfly Leuchars, all we might get is a distant roar ...
 
My brother went to Laarbruch (ASF) with the first GR1 operational deployment in the 80's, I'll send him this. Nice 1
 
typical you climb hill in west lothian with clear sight to bass rock yet fife resembles mordor in grey
According to some pix I’ve seen from Leuchars, although it was grey, they had a clear enough view.
As for my version of ‘typical’; I’d watched them on screen until they were at 1600ft over the Forth, was outside on our front steps, all set at least to listen - and the fire alarm went off. Info straight away was, it wasn’t a drill. I’m a senior marshal (= counting people who have counted heads) so against the flow I had to growl my way to my office, collect hi-vis and clipboard with list, back out to find hundreds of people vaguely lined up and three fire engines already there. So I missed the whole potential 30 seconds of nice noise. Have not yet got over the frustration!
 
My point is quite simple, it's a complete and utter waste of money.
Ignoring you're clearly a miserable joyless bugger, and probably not worth my time putting right, others on this thread will probably be happy to know RAF Marham FB page are saying it is not quite the last piece of flying by the mighty Tonka, with a 9-ship over Marham and Cranwell next Thursday and the very last flight over the disbandment parade.

Now back to @twentyfirstoffoot. Did you ever consider why aircrew, if you ever got to commissioned rank, would have been paid more than you whilst carrying the same rank? I assume from your title you never went AAC.

They got paid more because they were more highly skilled. More highly trained and more highly skilled. Did you ever see Tonka crews doing only 3 months in Afghanistan because they had to return back to the UK to achieve training objectives that couldn't be done in Afghanistan? Various simulator check rides?

These flights would have had undoubted training benefits. These pilots and Navs need to keep current for as long as possible prior to whatever re-training the RAF will give them after Tornado. The best way to do that is fly.

So stop being such a curmudgeonly small minded muppet.
 
Ignoring you're clearly a miserable joyless bugger, and probably not worth my time putting right, others on this thread will probably be happy to know RAF Marham FB page are saying it is not quite the last piece of flying by the mighty Tonka, with a 9-ship over Marham and Cranwell next Thursday and the very last flight over the disbandment parade.

Now back to @twentyfirstoffoot. Did you ever consider why aircrew, if you ever got to commissioned rank, would have been paid more than you whilst carrying the same rank? I assume from your title you never went AAC.

They got paid more because they were more highly skilled. More highly trained and more highly skilled. Did you ever see Tonka crews doing only 3 months in Afghanistan because they had to return back to the UK to achieve training objectives that couldn't be done in Afghanistan? Various simulator check rides?

These flights would have had undoubted training benefits. These pilots and Navs need to keep current for as long as possible prior to whatever re-training the RAF will give them after Tornado. The best way to do that is fly.

So stop being such a curmudgeonly small minded muppet.
What a load of over emotional twaddle
 
Who?
Whoever, with a potential £17billion budget deficit, a crisis in manning and the defence infrastructure crumbling around our ears, Biggles can get one last stiffy while he spends the rest of his career driving a desk while in receipt of full flying pay. Someone needs to get their effing priorities sorted out.
The Tornado GR4 does not officially leave service until 31 Mar 19. Until that point it could still technically be committed to ops and there is therefore funding allocated to flying (not least as aircraft need to be delivered for disposal in coming weeks).

Moreover, many of the aircrew involved will be going to other types such as F-35, Typhoon, P-8 and Reaper. Therefore, continued flying maintains skills which are every bit as relevant on their new types such as low-level navigation, formation, sensor and general handling.

The fact that the flypasts were included in this remaining flying allocation is immaterial and adds no cost whatsoever to the apportioned budget. Ultimately, it doesn’t cost any different whether a 3-ship is at low level over the Scottish highlands or several airbases and HQs.

So, with respect, your argument is moot.

Regards,
MM
 
I worked on them for 9 years, third line, deep strip and modification programmes. Heard a lot from the crews about trying to do everything in one airframe and ending up doing nothing well.
That said, for an Engineer, it was a superbly organised aircraft with a well referenced airframe. Every rib and panel numbered, every wire laser etched with a reference designator code every few metres and all cross referenced to the diagrams perfectly. Each loom classified and colour coded by Electromagnetic compatibility
Went on to the C130 J's after the Tonka's, supposedly the latest and greatest Glass Cockpit version of the Herc. By all accounts Lockheed supposedly hired itinerant Mexican Car workers to build it and thus saved themselves a few dollars. All you had was a one dimensional drawing, with nothing but the a few ribs labelled. No two airframes had the wires routed identically, sometimes completely on the wrong side of the centreline and as for the rivet lines....I've seen calmer seas.
Definitely felt the influence of Ze Hermans on the build quality, design and organisation of the Tornado, compared to the dogs breakfast of an offering from Lockheed Martin.
...straight out of the Airbus manual. Ease of access for mechs and avos is a priority with Airbus. American manuals vary from the sublime to the ridiculous, even for commercial aircraft. In saying that, older American manuals were clearly written by engineers and not lawyers. As one old boy said to me, American aircraft were designed by Kansas farm boys for Kansas farm boys to fix. European aircraft were designed for fully tooled up hangars to fix.
 
...straight out of the Airbus manual. Ease of access for mechs and avos is a priority with Airbus. American manuals vary from the sublime to the ridiculous, even for commercial aircraft. In saying that, older American manuals were clearly written by engineers and not lawyers. As one old boy said to me, American aircraft were designed by Kansas farm boys for Kansas farm boys to fix. European aircraft were designed for fully tooled up hangars to fix.
Said old boy had never tried to fit an Aero 27A C/L rack at 03:00. Give me the Tornado for that kind of thing every time.
 
You said it in your final line. No one really noticed and thousands of pounds went down the drain. Money we can't afford.
It's almost as if you had to nip down the garage and buy the Avgas yourself, Jesus get your head from up your arrse.
I can only presume that with your point of view, BBMF, Trooping The Colour are all just massive wastes of money? Have you taken into consideration that most of your posts have been rated as dumb?
I propose that the only "waste" of money is possibly your internet subscription!!!
 
Said old boy had never tried to fit an Aero 27A C/L rack at 03:00. Give me the Tornado for that kind of thing every time.
I had a go at a Dauphin manual one time. Aerospatiale had cleverly decided that the original A4 pages should be A5, so you had two rows of A-5 sheets in each folder, which is a pain to deal with. To do even the simplest task, by the book, you had to open the AMM, the IPC, vendor manuals, materials manuals and so on until you had about six manuals open on the bench. The older Alouette and Gazelle manuals were a model of clarity by comparison. Anyone who writes a tech manual should be made, at gunpoint, to carry out the tasks, to understand the errors of their ways.
 
The Tornado GR4 does not officially leave service until 31 Mar 19. Until that point it could still technically be committed to ops and there is therefore funding allocated to flying (not least as aircraft need to be delivered for disposal in coming weeks).
Any idea what the disposal plans are? I can imagine a couple going to museums and other collections, but what of the rest?
Will the Germans et al be grabbing some for spares (not sure just what beyond the airframe parts would be compatible with theirs)? Or are they simply for the chop?
 
Any idea what the disposal plans are? I can imagine a couple going to museums and other collections, but what of the rest?
Will the Germans et al be grabbing some for spares (not sure just what beyond the airframe parts would be compatible with theirs)? Or are they simply for the chop?
I heard something about the RAF keeping them for engineering students to tinker on? I am probably wrong though.

@Magic_Mushroom might, no will know.
 
I heard something about the RAF keeping them for engineering students to tinker on? I am probably wrong though.

@Magic_Mushroom might, no will know.
I don’t know but can make an educated guess based on what normally happens.

A handful will probably go to Cosford for technical training; some will go to museums. However, most will simply be stripped of viable components which can be recycled or sold to other users before the donor jets are scrapped.

Regards,
MM
 
An excellent potted history of the Tornado Programme has been put on line by Flight.

First Prototype, first flight, 1974...

...GR1 (original strike/attack variant)...

...GR1(T) (dual control trainer)...

...GR1A (recce)...

...GR1B (maritime strike)...

...F2 (original Air Defence variant)...

...F2(T) (dual control)...

...F3 (definitive AD variant)...

...F3(T) (dual control)...

...(E)F3 (SEAD)...

...GR4 (current strike/attack/recce variant).

Days to do for the old girl but history will remember the 'Fin' as a classic and extremely versatile combat aircraft that served the UK well...in all variants.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
Have had the pleasure of watching them take off from several airbases in fairly close proximity.
Will miss that distinctive crackly roar, which is quite different from the Typhoon.
Haven't heard an F-35 yet.

Tornado is an airframe that has stood the test of time and should be remembered with affection
 
...
Days to do for the old girl but history will remember the 'Fin' as a classic and extremely versatile combat aircraft that served the UK well in all variants.

Regards,
MM
However, when it first arrived in service it was very new and unreliable, we couldn't get spares and we had many hanger queens. There was a race to fix the unserviceable aircraft before someone came along and robbed bits of it to keep another one flying.

Anybody associated with the Buccaneer would tell you that the Tornado would never amount to much and would never replace the Buccaneer.

History repeats itself with those that think the F-35 won't amount to anything.

I'm hoping that some of the last airframes will survive at Cosford and elsewhere although they look strange without the engines that will have to go back as they're leased to us. The reverse thrust mechanism and buckets are part of the engine.

238 Squadron, RAF Cosford:
DSC_2995.jpg


Edited to add anther one and Jaguars (with engines).
DSC_3307.jpg

DSC_3538.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Forces Pension Society Armed Forces Pension Scheme 0
Yokel Royal Navy 30
radarboy Aviation 7

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top