Interesting Lightning Story
- Ian G
- UKAR Staff
- Posts: 2243
- Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 6:21 pm
- Location: Wolverhampton, West Midlands, UK
- Contact:
Interesting Lightning Story
Hi folks - first time posting on here since the board moved, I was eejy_100 on the old board but back as Ian G now!
Anyway, I was talking to a computer engineer at work today who came in to fix yet another broken computer for me and he was telling me that he used to be in the RAF working as an avionics technician on the Lightning and Wessex until he left in 1973 I think he said. Anyway he told me an interesting tale of when he was working with 56 Squadron at Wattisham in the mid-60's and how a lightning was not allowed to climb 90 degrees vertical after takeoff and were limited to only 89 degrees.
Apparently one day he was watching a formation on 10 lightnings take off, each one increasing climb angle after take off from the previous one and the last one climbed at 90 degrees straight up. The reheat then cut out and as the power drained, the lighting started to drop backwards through the sky, the pilot desperatly pressing the AC reset button unable to correct or push the nose forwards because he was vertical. Eventually the reheat was reset by the pilot and he went from going backwards to straight up through the cloud, punching what he called a 'lightning-shaped hole' in the cloud before doing a circuit, landing the aircraft, jumping out, changing coveralls and going back out in a new flight suit because he'd cacked himself! If he had been climbing at 89 degrees he would have been able to push the nose forwards and then land on non-reheat power.
It was an interesting story and something I'd never heard of before, wondered if there was a ring of truth around it or if anyone else had heard about this??!
Like the board by the way!
Ian
Anyway, I was talking to a computer engineer at work today who came in to fix yet another broken computer for me and he was telling me that he used to be in the RAF working as an avionics technician on the Lightning and Wessex until he left in 1973 I think he said. Anyway he told me an interesting tale of when he was working with 56 Squadron at Wattisham in the mid-60's and how a lightning was not allowed to climb 90 degrees vertical after takeoff and were limited to only 89 degrees.
Apparently one day he was watching a formation on 10 lightnings take off, each one increasing climb angle after take off from the previous one and the last one climbed at 90 degrees straight up. The reheat then cut out and as the power drained, the lighting started to drop backwards through the sky, the pilot desperatly pressing the AC reset button unable to correct or push the nose forwards because he was vertical. Eventually the reheat was reset by the pilot and he went from going backwards to straight up through the cloud, punching what he called a 'lightning-shaped hole' in the cloud before doing a circuit, landing the aircraft, jumping out, changing coveralls and going back out in a new flight suit because he'd cacked himself! If he had been climbing at 89 degrees he would have been able to push the nose forwards and then land on non-reheat power.
It was an interesting story and something I'd never heard of before, wondered if there was a ring of truth around it or if anyone else had heard about this??!
Like the board by the way!
Ian
-
- Posts: 261
- Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 8:04 am
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
I for one can't believe this.Does this mean in a dog fight with an enemy aircraft it couldnt go 90 degrees vertical . 1 degree may have been critical for a kill, if only the Russians knew! It might have been a prob on initial take off,but ive never heard of this.
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
I'd say it's nonsense.
With the stab and fin being at the back of the aircraft, if it started to fall backward, it would weathercock. Even with full control, a tiny deviation from vertical would be divergent and it would be almost impossible to keep it going backward.
With the stab and fin being at the back of the aircraft, if it started to fall backward, it would weathercock. Even with full control, a tiny deviation from vertical would be divergent and it would be almost impossible to keep it going backward.
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
Sounds like he's a Walter Mitty to me. I'd love to see what they make of this on pprune
There may be an element of truth hidden in there somewhere, if there is, it seems to have grown into somewhat of an anglers story!
There may be an element of truth hidden in there somewhere, if there is, it seems to have grown into somewhat of an anglers story!
If only the F-35B could loose as much weight.....
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
Story sent to former Lightning pilot - I await his response!
-
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:35 pm
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
The one Lightning take off and 'straight up'(from take off) I remember with real clarity was my much vaunted XS928 at Brize 1983......but then again 89 degrees isnt that far off 90 degrees is it!
I was right at point of rotation and I,d say the angle to levelling off was a few degrees less than 90 to be honest,and I think this pilot had a real go,he had a decent crowd just to see his take off!
I was right at point of rotation and I,d say the angle to levelling off was a few degrees less than 90 to be honest,and I think this pilot had a real go,he had a decent crowd just to see his take off!
- capercaillie
- Posts: 9336
- Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 3:04 pm
- Location: Leominster
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
Did a formation of pigs flypast as well, or were they all bullocks?
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
There was something about a restriction put in place on Lightning rotation takeoffs in one of Stewart Scotts books, but I think it involved an F6 crashing at Tengah and nowt to do with this story. I'll see if I can find it.
WIWOL
- jaguarfarewellday
- Posts: 1297
- Joined: Fri 20 Mar 2009, 12:29 pm
- Location: RAF Rochford Essex !
- Contact:
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
Ian G wrote:Hi folks - first time posting on here since the board moved, I was eejy_100 on the old board but back as Ian G now!
Anyway, I was talking to a computer engineer at work today who came in to fix yet another broken computer for me and he was telling me that he used to be in the RAF working as an avionics technician on the Lightning and Wessex until he left in 1973 I think he said. Anyway he told me an interesting tale of when he was working with 56 Squadron at Wattisham in the mid-60's and how a lightning was not allowed to climb 90 degrees vertical after takeoff and were limited to only 89 degrees.
Apparently one day he was watching a formation on 10 lightnings take off, each one increasing climb angle after take off from the previous one and the last one climbed at 90 degrees straight up. The reheat then cut out and as the power drained, the lighting started to drop backwards through the sky, the pilot desperatly pressing the AC reset button unable to correct or push the nose forwards because he was vertical. Eventually the reheat was reset by the pilot and he went from going backwards to straight up through the cloud, punching what he called a 'lightning-shaped hole' in the cloud before doing a circuit, landing the aircraft, jumping out, changing coveralls and going back out in a new flight suit because he'd cacked himself! If he had been climbing at 89 degrees he would have been able to push the nose forwards and then land on non-reheat power.
It was an interesting story and something I'd never heard of before, wondered if there was a ring of truth around it or if anyone else had heard about this??!
Like the board by the way!
Ian
TS010 wrote:There was something about a restriction put in place on Lightning rotation takeoffs in one of Stewart Scotts books, but I think it involved an F6 crashing at Tengah and nowt to do with this story. I'll see if I can find it.
On 27 July 1970 a 74F Sqn BAC Lightning F mk6 XS930 being flown by Flt Lt Frank Whitehouse was killed at RAF Tengah whilst performing a vertical take-off along with a chinese farmer Cheong Say Wai in his field. There were also 100 building destroyed in a near by Malay Village with two villagers suffering injuries as well.
After getting airbourne safely from Tengah and , some 300ft short of the runway barrier , he rotated. The Lightning snap into the vertical without climbing and mush along before staggering to 400ft. The aircraft then autorotated , coming down like a leaf , then after what looked like a recovery it disappeared behind a screen of trees, a pall of smoke confirmed the worst !.
Frank did eject but was to close to the ground , just separating from the seat !. It was found a shift in fuel from the wings towards the rear , had unbalanced the aircraft , something Frank never knew of at the time. The RAF and manufacturer looked into the centre of gravity issue of the jet afterwards.
From book ~ The story of 74 squadron RAF
Regards
Paul
74F Sqn assoc member
Last edited by jaguarfarewellday on Thu 26 Mar 2009, 5:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
what we have here is a complete lack of respect for the law !
- jaguarfarewellday
- Posts: 1297
- Joined: Fri 20 Mar 2009, 12:29 pm
- Location: RAF Rochford Essex !
- Contact:
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
Ian G wrote:Hi folks - first time posting on here since the board moved, I was eejy_100 on the old board but back as Ian G now!
Anyway, I was talking to a computer engineer at work today who came in to fix yet another broken computer for me and he was telling me that he used to be in the RAF working as an avionics technician on the Lightning and Wessex until he left in 1973 I think he said. Anyway he told me an interesting tale of when he was working with 56 Squadron at Wattisham in the mid-60's and how a lightning was not allowed to climb 90 degrees vertical after takeoff and were limited to only 89 degrees.
Apparently one day he was watching a formation on 10 lightnings take off, each one increasing climb angle after take off from the previous one and the last one climbed at 90 degrees straight up. The reheat then cut out and as the power drained, the lighting started to drop backwards through the sky, the pilot desperatly pressing the AC reset button unable to correct or push the nose forwards because he was vertical. Eventually the reheat was reset by the pilot and he went from going backwards to straight up through the cloud, punching what he called a 'lightning-shaped hole' in the cloud before doing a circuit, landing the aircraft, jumping out, changing coveralls and going back out in a new flight suit because he'd cacked himself! If he had been climbing at 89 degrees he would have been able to push the nose forwards and then land on non-reheat power.
It was an interesting story and something I'd never heard of before, wondered if there was a ring of truth around it or if anyone else had heard about this??!
Like the board by the way!
Ian
F3 Lightning
In 1963 during a display work up by 74F Sqn they found the stick-jamming at in conditions of high g loading. On investigation , it was found that balance weights attached to the lower end of the control column could foul the structure beneath the cockpit flooring when the aircraft was pulling in excess of 2g. After this discovery the aircraft were restircted to 2g as a max.
Cheers
Paul
what we have here is a complete lack of respect for the law !
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
On 27 July 1970 a 74F Sqn BAC Lightning F mk6 XS930 being flown by Flt Lt Frank Whitehouse was killed at RAF Tengah whilst performing a vertical take-off along with a chinese farmer Cheong Say Wai in his field. There were also 100 building destroyed in a near by Malay Village with two villagers suffering injuries as well.
After getting airbourne safely from Tengah and , some 300ft short of the runway barrier , he rotated. The Lightning snap into the vertical without climbing and mush along before staggering to 400ft. The aircraft then autorotated , coming down like a leaf , then after what looked like a recovery it disappeared behind a screen of trees, a pall of smoke confirmed the worst !.
Frank did eject but was to close to the ground , just separating from the seat !. It was found a shift in fuel from the wings towards the rear , had unbalanced the aircraft , something Frank never knew of at the time. The RAF and manufacturer looked into the centre of gravity issue of the jet afterwards.
From book ~ The story of 74 squadron RAF
That's the one.
WIWOL
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
jaguarfarewellday wrote:Ian G wrote:Hi folks - first time posting on here since the board moved, I was eejy_100 on the old board but back as Ian G now!
It was an interesting story and something I'd never heard of before, wondered if there was a ring of truth around it or if anyone else had heard about this??!
Ian
F3 Lightning
In 1963 during a display work up by 74F Sqn they found the stick-jamming at in conditions of high g loading. On investigation , it was found that balance weights attached to the lower end of the control column could foul the structure beneath the cockpit flooring when the aircraft was pulling in excess of 2g. After this discovery the aircraft were restircted to 2g as a max.
Cheers
Paul
Do you mean 2G on rotation only ? F3's certainly exceedeed 2G in normal display flying .
As for the dropping backwards tale - I heard a similar story which I have no reason to doubt . I was on 92 Sqdn groundcrew RAFG in the late 60's and a colleague told us about an event which occurred in the UK involving one of our pilots - not sure which Squadron he (the pilot) was on at the time it occurred .
The story went that he was in a rotation take off and lost reheat , did a backward falling leaf till reheat was re- engaged and miraculously began ascending just as he was about to disappear behind the trees .
I have no great reason to disbelieve the essence of this story - like all it maybe got a bit jazzed up but that's human nature .
Edited to remove "vertically" - not sure that that was what I was told ( 40 years ago) - on reflection maybe he just recovered the situation and got away with it.
It would be nice to hear from someone who witnessed the event ( if indeed it happened )
Last edited by Neilf92 on Sun 12 Apr 2009, 9:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
Ian G wrote:Hi folks - first time posting on here since the board moved, I was eejy_100 on the old board but back as Ian G now!
Anyway, I was talking to a computer engineer at work today who came in to fix yet another broken computer for me and he was telling me that he used to be in the RAF working as an avionics technician on the Lightning and Wessex until he left in 1973 I think he said. Anyway he told me an interesting tale of when he was working with 56 Squadron at Wattisham in the mid-60's and how a lightning was not allowed to climb 90 degrees vertical after takeoff and were limited to only 89 degrees.
Apparently one day he was watching a formation on 10 lightnings take off, each one increasing climb angle after take off from the previous one and the last one climbed at 90 degrees straight up. The reheat then cut out and as the power drained, the lighting started to drop backwards through the sky, the pilot desperatly pressing the AC reset button unable to correct or push the nose forwards because he was vertical. Eventually the reheat was reset by the pilot and he went from going backwards to straight up through the cloud, punching what he called a 'lightning-shaped hole' in the cloud before doing a circuit, landing the aircraft, jumping out, changing coveralls and going back out in a new flight suit because he'd cacked himself! If he had been climbing at 89 degrees he would have been able to push the nose forwards and then land on non-reheat power.
It was an interesting story and something I'd never heard of before, wondered if there was a ring of truth around it or if anyone else had heard about this??!
Like the board by the way!
Ian
Hi, Ive been knocking this one around, not knowing what to think, it sounded so far fetched to me, anyway I got onto one of our pilots, Dennis Brooks who has considerable Lightning and Tornado expereince;
Here's his reply:
Andy
What a load of bollxxxx. Firstly the difference between 89 and 90 degrees is minute and not even the smartest Lightning pilot would be able to tell the difference. The aircraft controls would work in exactly the same way at 90 deg as they would at 89 deg, as indeed they do at any aircraft attitude. The thrust of the Lightning is less than its all up weight so it could not sustain a vertical climb. To suggest that restoration of reheat would transform a tailslide into a vertical climb is complete rubbish. I suggest that this guy sticks to mending computers rather than talking rubbish.
Dennis
-
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:35 pm
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
I wouldnt know the exact climb angles,and I wasnt usually level enough to tell,but I certainly saw one or two decent Lightning climbs to what was generally described by the commentators as 25,000ft,since thats best part of 5 miles and the aircraft usually seemed within the airfield perimeters,if the climb wasnt precisely vertical It was still pretty sharp!.....admitted most zooms were after the usual fast run and had the Inertia to carry it,but I did witness the one climb(of any real height)from a standing start(as said a few posts back )for once I was level with the rotation and got it as good as I ever did...I wouldnt argue the angle would have been a bit under the 90 degree mark,and It didnt go quite as high as in a normal zoom climb,but then Its purpose was to level out and come back around to give us all another go,and dont forget this was an F6!
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
320psi wrote:Hi, Ive been knocking this one around, not knowing what to think, it sounded so far fetched to me, anyway I got onto one of our pilots, Dennis Brooks who has considerable Lightning and Tornado expereince;
Here's his reply:
Andy
What a load of bollxxxx. Firstly the difference between 89 and 90 degrees is minute and not even the smartest Lightning pilot would be able to tell the difference. The aircraft controls would work in exactly the same way at 90 deg as they would at 89 deg, as indeed they do at any aircraft attitude. The thrust of the Lightning is less than its all up weight so it could not sustain a vertical climb. To suggest that restoration of reheat would transform a tailslide into a vertical climb is complete rubbish. I suggest that this guy sticks to mending computers rather than talking rubbish.
Dennis
Well that answers that. But I'd be interested to hear what someone like John Spencer or Ian Wilde would have to say on the subject.
-
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:35 pm
Re: Interesting Lightning Story
I,m sure the aircraft that can go literally straight up or almost,would only find it useful for airshows anyway wouldnt they!
I,m no anorak on these things,but surely if a 'bandit' is picked up over the North Sea etc,an aircraft that goes up at 45 degrees from the mainland is likely to be there slightly before an 89er?
I,m no anorak on these things,but surely if a 'bandit' is picked up over the North Sea etc,an aircraft that goes up at 45 degrees from the mainland is likely to be there slightly before an 89er?