The History of

W[?OtswO[ill9~

[NJoDOtsw[?2!U[?wO[ill0[ill~&0 [?CS[?W1Jts

, , The History of---

Preceding pages. North Amencan Harvards of the Harvard Formation Team. (via AnthonyHulton)

ISBN 0 85429 579 8

A Foulis Aviation Book

First published 1987

© Ray Sturtivant and Haynes Publishing Group 1987

All ngh s reserved 0 part of hIS book may be reproduced or ransml ted m any form or by anymeans, elec romc or mechamcal. mcludmg photocopymg, recordmg, or by any mformatlon s orageor retneval system, wIthout permIssion of he p'jblIsher

Published by:Haynes Publishing GroupSparkford, Nr. Yeovil, SomersetBA22 7]], England.

Haynes Publications Inc.861 Lawrence Drive, Newbury Park,California 91320, USA.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication data

SurtIvant, RayThe hIstory of Bntams mIlItary trammg alrcraI Trammg planes - Great Bn am - HIstory2 Alrplanes, III ary Great Bn am HIs oryI TIle62374620941 UGI242 T6ISB 0-85429-579-8

Library of Congress catalog card n mber 87-82239

Editor: Mansur DarlingtonPage layout: Chris HullPrinted in England by: ].H. Haynes & Co. Ltd

7Introduction

9Chapter 1 Early Days

17Chapter 2 Put to the test

27Chapter 3 The Fallow Years

35Chapter 4 The Onslaught

of War

41Chapter 5 The Post-war Years

49Chapter 6 The Navy Way

Training Aircraft Profiles

56Avro 504

61de Havilland Tiger Moth

69Hawker Hart Trainer

77Avro Anson

89Airspeed Oxford

97Colour Plates

105Miles Magister

IIIMiles Master

119North American Harvard

127Percival Prentice

135Hunting Percival Provost

145Boulton Paul Balliol

• £

/

153Colour Plates

161de Havilland Chipmunk

171Gloster Meteor Trainer

181Vickers Varsity

189de Havilland

Vampire Trainer

197Hunting Jet Provost

207Hawker Hunter T.7

213Hawker Siddeley Gnat

223British Aerospace Hawk

229AerospatialejWestland

Gazelle

235British Aerospace Jetstream

241Shorts Tucano

245Appendix 1 Trainer

Contract Specifications

246Appendix 2 Trainer

Production since 1919

251Glossary

253Index

Innumerable books have been written about oper­ational aircraft which have served over the yearswith the Royal Air Force and the Fleet

Air Arm, Some have dealt with a particular type ofaircraft, others with a group of aircraft designed to fulfila particular function, generally fighters or bombers,Very few authors however have attempted to devote awhole book to a particular training type, and none haveseen fit to devote a full length volume to the subject oftraining aircraft in general.

This apparent lack of interest amongst authors andtheir publishers has sadly been reflected in officialquarters, The Public Record Office, for instance, holdsmany thousands of aviation files deposited over theyears by various ministries, and these include muchuseful material pertaining to the origins, constructionand testing of RAF aircraft, Where these wereoperational types, whether prototypes or productionaircraft, sufficient material has generally been retainedto preserve a fairly complete story for posterity,Training aircraft, unfortunately, seem to have beenconsidered to be of limited interest, with the result thatmost relevant files have long since been sent fordestruction, Added to this, the disappearance of all theolder names in the British aviation industry has led to asimilar loss of relevant company records,

This lack of interest in trainers is certainly notreflected amongst the many hundreds of thousandswho attend air shows every summer. The Gnats andHawks flown over the last quarter of a century by theRed Arrows are just as much welcomed by theair-minded public as were their pre-war predecessors,the aerobatic Tutors of the Central Flying School.Displays at Old Warden and elsewhere evoke a livelyinterest in surviving examples of such types as theAvro 504, Tutor, Magister, Tiger Moth and Harvard,Such aircraft bring back especial nostalgia to the manythousands of airmen who trained on them in years goneby, as well as the thousands more who worked on themas ground crew,

It is not possible in one book to do justice in detailto every type of training aircraft ever flown by the RAFand the other services, nor to the many hundreds oftraining units with which they were flown, The firstsElction of this book is therefore devoted to a generaloutline of the development of training in this country,whilst the second section concentrates on a representa­tive selection of 22 training types from the many flownover the three-quarters of a century which have

elapsed since British military aviation commenced, Theselection is purely the author's own choice, and allexcept the Harvard, Chipmunk, Gazelle and Tucanoare of British origin, the reasons for the inclusion ofthese four being readily apparent from the text,Appendices summarise the official Specifications is­sued in respect of requirements for trainers, produc­tion details of all training aircraft and the main unitswith which each type served,

The text for each aircraft explains how it came tobe built and also outlines, where relevant, anypoliticial, technical or economic factors affecting itsadoption and construction, Of equal, or perhapsgreater, importance, is its actual operation once it wentinto service, Viewpoints have therefore been sought,from a variety of people who were involved asstudents, instructors or ground crew, From these haveemerged a very clear picture of whether it wassuccessful or unsuccessful, loved or hated, tame or apotential killer. Such types as the Avro 504 and TigerMoth were well loved in their day, whilst their Prenticesuccessor was regarded as a bad joke and the MeteorTrainer was feared by many, More recently, the JetProvost has served faithfully for thirty years, and isonly now being replaced in a reversion to propeller­driven initial training aircraft,

Many people have given of their time to helpproduce a good cross-section of the subject. In thisrespect my special thanks are due to both Don Marchand WO Paddy Porter, MBE, without whose invaluableefforts I would have been unable to provide such awide coverage of personal recollections by bothaircrew and ground crew, Also to Mike Keep for hismagnificent cockpit drawings, prepared to his usualhigh standard, often from surviving source material ofindifferent quality,

Sincere thanks are also due to the many otherpeople and organisations who have generouslyprovided me with material, photographs or recollec­tions, I am particularly grateful to those who havespared the time to either write or tape-recordreminiscences, many of which have been very candid,These have helped me to build up a picture of trainingas seen through their own eyes at the time, and from avariety of viewpoints, Such credits are due to: ChrisAshworth; Aviation News; Cdr Peter Bagley, R (Rtd);Rick Barker (Keeper, RAF Museum); Bill Bateman; LtLouis Beardsworth, RN; Harold Bennett; Flt Lt Peter A,Bouch, RAF; Chaz Bowyer; Cecil Bristow; British

• ; [ ~..•'., :., )1­;

Farnborough and Larkhill, whilst the Naval FlyingSchool, as Eastchurch had become two months earlier,would form the nucleus for the new Naval Wing. Inpractice the title Naval Wing was never popular andthe term Royal Naval Air Service came to be adopted.

Under the reorganisation, basic flying instructionwas for the first time recognised as an officialresponsibility, and on the same date that the RFC wasformed, a Central Flying School was ordered to be setup to provide basic training for officers of both wings.Based at Upavon, it would be relatively near to theremainder of existing Army aviation. A newaerodrome was to be built on a hilltop above thevillage, until then used as Army training gallops, withseemingly no thought being given to the difficulties thiswould provide for the trainee pilots when theyattempted to battle with the consequent air turbulence.The necessary buildings were quickly completed, andon 19 June 1912 the school officially opened, the firstcourse commencing on 15 August.

Bleriot Monoplane 'No 4' dunng military trials atLarkhill in 1912

(RAF Museum photo No P00903)

The first Commandant of the CFS was CaptainGodfrey Paine, RN, who had only recently beenappointed commanding officer of the EastchurchschooL He was given a bare fortnight in which to gainhis flying brevet, and Longmore found himself with thetask, which he successfully performed, of ensuring thatPaine did so. Samson then took over command atEastchurch, and promptly set about his new duties withhis customary zest, enlarging the facilities and forminghis command into what was to prove a real fightingforce when war eventually broke out. In true navalfashion, the aerodrome was given a ship's name,becoming HMS Pembroke II in 1913, under theparentage of HMS Pembroke at Chatham.

Despite having a sailor in charge, however, the

CFS never managed to take over its intendedresponsibilities for naval training. Their Lordshipsregarded aeroplanes as an extension of their warships,and therefore to be used to help win sea battles, and inthis they were wholeheartedly supported by their FirstLord, Winston ChurchilL They also objected to thearrangement whereby naval personnel in the RFCwould be paid and administered by the Admiralty, whowould then have only shared responsibility with theWar Office. Not deigning to become involved ininter-service argument they simply continued to useEastchurch, their pilots then being primarily sailors,trained in a naval atmosphere, and liable to generalnaval service.

It was recognised in setting up the CFS that theestablishment of a service training school could have adetrimental effect on the many civilian schools aroundthe country, and it was therefore decided that serviceofficers or civilians who wished to take commissions inthe Royal Flying Corps would first have to learn therudiments at one of the civilian schools. Once havinggained an RAeC certificate, they could apply foradmission to the CFS, and if accepted would beawarded £75 to help recompense the cost of theirprivate tuition. They would then undergo a four-monthcourse of military tuition, during which they would notonly be given more advanced flying lessons, but wouldlearn how to maintain their aircraft and engines, inaddition to being instructed in navigation, meteoro­logy, photography and signalling.

10

The original plan was for 146 pupils to passthrough the CFS each year, in three successivecourses, comprising 91 military, 40 naval and 15civilian pilots. Orders were placed for 25 aircraft, andthese would bear identification numbers in the series401 - 600, which would distinguish them from those ofthe Military Wing (201 - 400) and the Naval Wing (l ­200). The first machines to bear these numbers were anassorted collection which included the Short SchoolBiplane, Bristol Boxkite, Avro Type E and MauriceFarman Longhorn, these being later supplemented bysuch types as the Henri Farman F.20, DeperdussinMonoplane and early BE variants. The Deperdussinswere soon withdrawn, however, after a Military Wingmachine of this type broke up in the air on 6September, followed four days later by a fairly similarmishap to a Bristol monoplane, leading to a ban on allmonoplanes for military purposes, a decision whichwas not overturned until February 1913.

By mid-March 1913, the RFC had 123 pilots, thoughonly 45 of these had passed all the CFS tests, andbetween them they had aggregated 1,550 flying hours,roughly half of this being at the CFS. By contrast, theNaval wing by the end of the May had 57 pilots, flyingBE, Bristol, Caudron, Farman, Short, Sopwith and

Vickers Type VI monoplane 'No 3' dunng militarytrials at Larkhillin 1912

(J.M Bruce/CS Leslie collection)

Bottom:Short S27 Blplane used by the RNAS at Eastchurch.Horace and Eustace Short are in the foreground, andCecl] Crace in the cockpit.

lj,M Bruce/C,S Leslie collection)

(A. V Roe and Co, Ltd)

Top:Avro Type E (later Type 500) No 406 with 50 hp Cnomeengine, of the Central Flying School at Upavon around1913.

Vickers biplanes, and Bleriot, Borel, Bristol, Deperd­ussin and Nieuport monoplanes,

One of the most significant events of that year,however, was at that stage quite unconnected with themilitary, This was the introduction of the Avro 504,which made its first public appearance at Hendon forthe Aerial Derby of 20 September 1913, Thestraightforward and pleasing design of this tractorbiplane, powered by an 80 hp Gnome rotary engine,attracted much attention, not least by the RFC, Thepotential for service purposes of this workmanlike

commenced an element broke away to set up aReserve Aeroplane Squadron here. The CFS was in noposition to spare many instructors, so several militarypilots were returned from France, and these wereaugmented by civilian pilots who volunteered theirservices. The RAS was equipped with about 10 aircraft,which included Morane and Bleriot monoplanes,Maurice Farman Shorthorn and Longhorn biplanes, anda B.E.2a biplane.

This was only a beginning, however, and fur hernew schools would be required, as well as aerodromesto accommodate hem. Fortunately some mili aryaerodromes were now partially or wholly vacantfollowing the departure of he active squadrons toFrance, and these were supplemented by requisi­tioning several civilian aerodromes. Work alsocommenced on building entirely new aerodromes invarious parts of the country.

This policy helped to reduce overcrowding aestablished aerodromes in the sou h, but had thedisadvantage of diluting meagre resources, so that agreater number of ins ructors became necessary hanmight otherwise have been the case. As partial

Chapter 2[P(l1]~ ~(Q)

~GlJ® ~®~

By the time Second World War broke out, theMilitary Wing had already expanded to sevensquadrons, scattered around at Brooklands,

Montrose, Netheravon, Eastchurch, Gosport and Farn­borough. I was obvious that more would be necessary,and i quickly became equally apparen that he CFSwould not have he resources to train the greatlyincreased number of pilots likely to be required, both

crushing him beneath the engine.The independent line adopted by the Admiralty

was given formal approval on 1July, when the RFC wasofficially split. The naval element now became theRoyal Naval Air Service, a title which it had alreadyadopted unofficially. It was to comprise an AirDepartment (Admiralty), a Central Air Office, Royal

aval Air Sta ions and the Royal aval Flying School.All R AS officers, of which there were then 95, wouldbe naval officers, and hese would be required to servea spell at sea in a warship every year. The Admiraltydrew the line, however, a permi ting hem actually 0

take charge of a ship.Henceforth, the avy would no longer have any

interest in the CFS, which would in future beadministered only by the War Office. From 1 January1914 until the outbreak of war on 4 August, 23 fullytrained pupils were turned out at Upavon, in addition towhich a further 3 were trained at the Military Wingaerodrome a etheravon, which was also used fromime to time by a detached flight of he CFS.

.eillt--aftmachine was readily apparent, and within six mon hsan order had been placed for 12 machines for theMili ary Wing, he first of many thousands to be built forservice flying. The aval Wing also took an interest,and soon afterwards placed an order for 50 of the 504Bvariant, with various modifications.

The first fatal crash at the CFS occurred on 3October, when Major Merrick, landing at Upavon inperfect weather conditions, made a gliding approachfrom 300 ft at a rather steep angle. It was afterwardsconjectured hat he slipped forward on to the controlcolumn, pushing it forward, as the machine went into adive and then into a bun on to its back, throwing himout. A safety belt might have saved his life, but fear offire prevented many of the pilots of the day from usingthe belts which were then available, even though somewere of a quick-release type. A second fatality atUpavon took place on 19 March 1914, when Lt Treebytook a Maurice Farman up for a twenty minute flight. Hethrot led back on approach from abou 350 ft, bu keptthe nose too high and his machine stalled and dived in,

for the new squadrons, and to make good wastage inaction.

Several squadrons were rushed to France, but 6Squadron at Farnborough was one of those thatremained behind for a time, and shortly after hostilities

Caudron-type biplane bUllt and used by the Ruffy­Baumann school from 1915 to teach RFC officerrecruits.

(].M Bruce/C.S. Leslie collection)

• $ cr ~-.It'.

compensation for this, however, aircraft could bedelivered fairly locally from factories in various partsof the country, and the work of this comparatively newservice would become visible to members of therapidly expanding Army, who could then begin tolearn something of its value to them.

The first civilian establishment to become incorpo­rated was that at Brooklands, which on 12 Novemberbecame o. 2 Reserve Aeroplane Squadron, theoriginal Farnborough school then being restyledI RAS. This month also saw the decentralisation of theRFC, with the forma ion on 29 ovember of severalWings. These included the Administra ive Wing, basedat Farnborough, where it controlled the RFC depot. theRecord Office and the Aircraft Park, as well as beingadministratively responsible for the ReserveAeroplane Squadron organisation. The RASs, inaddition to their training function, would also bear theresponsibili y for bringing into existence new activeservice squadrons.

The third RAS was formed at etheravon on 21January 1915 from the existing raining element there,and eight days later I RAS gave birth at Farnboroughto 4 RAS, which at the beginning of March moved to anew aerodrome at Nor holt. This new school had itsfirst offshoot when 18 Squadron formed at ortholt onII May, leaving on 16 August for Norwich where itundertook further training before going across toFrance in ovember. Further new schools now camethick and fast, and many well known aerodromes oflater years had their origins in this phase. By the end of1915 training aerodromes had been opened at suchwidespread locations as Castle Bromwich, Catterick,

orwich, Joyce Green, Dover, Lydd, Thetford, Beau­lieu and Waddon (Croydon). By the end of the yearhere were 17 in operation, some stations being sharedby two schools.

It had not been possible to introduce any form ofstandardisation of equipment, and the concept of anaircraft being designed specifically to meet the trainingneeds of the RFC would at that stage have beenconsidered a novel one. Schools consequently had avaried mixture of British and French designs, some ofthe latter being built under licence in the UnitedKingdom. In addition there were some Canadian-builtCurtisses, and obsolescent first line machines werealso pressed into service. Types in use included mostof these already referred to, plus the Bleriot Parasol,Bristol Scout, Caudron G.3, Voisin Biplane, MartinsydeS.l, Vickers F.B.5 variants, Royal Aircraft FactoryB.E.2c and Armstrong Whitworth F.K.3. The CFS hadfairly similar equipment, augmented by a few otherRoyal Aircraft Factory-built machines, such as theR.E.5.

Expansion at his pace was again beginning tostrain the organisation, and in August 1915 heAdministrative Wing began to gradually relinquish

most of its responsibilities for he RASs, which thenstar ed to come under the control of home-basednumbered Wings of the RFC, largely organised on ageographical basis. Thus 7 RAS at Netheravon wastransferred to the 4th Wing at that station, whilst 3 RASat Shoreham and later 2 RAS at Brooklands came underthe 5th Wing at Gosport. The 6th Wing at Dover had aheavy raining commitmen, with administrative re­sponsibility for 9 RAS at Norwich and 10 RAS at JoyceGreen, these being soon af erwards augmented by12 RAS and 15 RAS at Thetford, 13 RAS at Dover, and17 RAS at Waddon. With the departure to the MiddleEast in ovember of the 5th Wing, its training functionwas taken over by the 7th Wing, which later also added4 RAS and II RAS at Northolt and 16 RAS at Beaulieu.The 8th Wing began to form at the end of the year atCatterick, and this then took over control of 14 RASthere, as well as 5 RAS at Castle Bromwich and 6 RAS atMontrose. By the end of 1915 this left only thelocally-based I RAS beholden to the AdministrativeWing a Farnborough.

The nomenclature of these units was unnecessarilyclumsy, and on 16 January 1916 this was simplified bydropping the middle word, so that they became plainReserve Squadrons. During the year most of thesurviving older types of aircraft gradually expired orcrashed, and newer designs began to appear on thescene, such as the De Havilland D.H.l, D.H.2 and D.H.5,Sopwith Pup and 11/2 Strutter, and Royal AircraftFactory B.E.2e, B.E.12, F.E.2b, F.E.2d and F.E.8.

The B.E.2c was proving 0 be one of the mainstaysof these schools. Originally intended as a reconnaiss­ance and artillery observation machine, i was nowbecoming obsolete for front line purposes, and insteadbeing relegated to training use. It was by no meansunsuited to this purpose, having been designed as asafe, stable and reliable aeroplane, though it could incertain conditions have a tendency to get into a spin ifnot controlled well. The real workhorses, however,were the two 70 hp Renault-powered Maurice Farmantypes, which were French machines manufacturedunder licence in some numbers. They were bothpusher biplanes fitted with tail-booms, but otherwisediffered radically in design. In front of the fuselagenacelle each had projecting skids, but these alsodiffered, the long upturned skid of the S.7 causing it tobe nicknamed the 'Longhorn', whilst the short skid ofthe S.ll gave rise to the appellation 'Shorthorn', thoughthe term 'Rumpety' was also sometimes applied to thislatter machine. They were both reasonably safeaircraft, capable of withstanding a fair amount ofmishandling by pupil pilots, and both served in thiscapacity, though in decreasing numbers, throughoutthe war.

By the beginning of 1916, Zeppelin raids, espe­cially those against the capital, were giving increasingcause for concern. A loose air defence organisation

I

Above:Martinsyde 5.1 2451 of No 2 Reserve AeroplaneSquadron on the flooded aerodrome at Brooklands inthe spring of 1915.

(via HF Shear)

Below:Maurice Farman Longhorn 307, nicknamed 'The TicketMachine', with No 2 Reserve Aeroplane Squadron atBrook1ands In 1915.

(via HF Shear)

• t 51: ~-.I;'. .IOf'•;

formed on 3 April 1916 at Christ Church, Oxford, bothbecoming Schools of Military Aeronautics on 27October. No. 1 Training Centre was also set up mNovember 1915, at The Curragh in Ireland.

In addition to these, specialised armament instruc­tion was available from 3 October 1915 at the MachineGun School, initially at Dover until moving on 27

ovember to ake advantage of better facilities atHythe. Renamed the School of Aerial Gunnery on 13September 1916, it gave instruction in operating theLewis gun to officers and men temporanly detachedfrom their squadrons. Wireless communication wasnow becoming more common, and a WirelessExperimental Flight formed in December 1915 atBrooklands to provide instruction for observers andwireless officers, being later renamed the WirelessSchool, and from 24 October 1916 the Wireless andObservers School. There was also a School forWireless Operators at Farnborough, and a WirelessTesting Park at Biggin Hill. .

The introduction of new and faster types of aIrcraft,and the development of more complex forms of aerialfighting, coupled with a high at rition rate amongst newpilots joining the squadrons in France, was begmnmgto give cause for concern by early 1916, and m Marchnew qualification standards were mtroduced for pIlottraining. Before gaining his wings, a pupil would nowhave to complete 15 hours solo flying, make two 15minute flights at 6,000 ft, and successfully land twice atnight with the assistance of flares. Having achieved this,he was still not ready to be allowed overseas, but musthave had as much further practise as possible inlanding, bomb-dropping, aerial fighting, night flyingand formation flying.

From May, a War Office order also authorisedwhat was referred to as trick flying and the practisingof flying manoeuvres. The qualification for pilots wasagain stepped up in December, when pilots wererequired to complete between 20 and 28 hours of soloflying, depending on the type of aircraft being flown.Training would also include gunnery, artillery obser­vation, photography and bomb-dropping.

The organisation too was becoming more sophisti­cated. On 15 January 1916 the 6th Brigade was formed,becoming the Training Brigade on 20 July, responsiblefor all Reserve Squadrons. Mose of these then ceasedto be all-through schools, some becoming responsibleonly for elementary training and the remainder forhigher training. This distinction was to some extentreflected in their types of aircraft, but not m theIr htles.

A need was now seen for training facilities insupport of the squadrons involved in fighting againstTurkish forces in Egypt, Palestine and MesopotamIa. InApril 1916, a nucleus for a new 21 RS was formed by3 RS at Shoreham, and the components of this sailed forEgypt in stages from 18 May, to be established atAbbassia. It was soon followed by 22 RS and 23 RS at

Aboukir (or Abu Qir), he tropical climate then beinginficted on such types as the Maurice Farman, Avro504A, BE.2c{e, Bristol Scout and Caudron G.3. InSeptember these units became responsible 0 a new20th (Reserve) Wing within the Middle East Bngade ofhe RFC, based at Aboukir. Technical knowledge wasimparted at Aboukir from 21 August by a TechnicalTraining Class, this becoming 0 3 School of MllltaryAeronautics on 29 ovember.

At home the seemingly insatiable demands of thesquadrons fighting on the Western Front were beingmet by a steadily increasing number of new ReserveSchools, and by the beginning of 1917 there were 42 ofthese, with two more being formed in Egypt. Evengreater increases were being planned for 1917, acomplement of 97 Reserve Schools being givenapproval in January, of which two were to speclallse mnight flying. The administration was therefore oncemore beginning to totter under the load, and furtherdevolution was now overdue. Accordingly on 10January the Training Brigade was decentralised.

Three geographically-based Group Commandswere now set up, each subdivided further into hree orfour Reserve Wings. At Salisbury, the Southern GroupCommand became responsible for the 4th Wing at

etheravon, the 17th Wing at Gospor (later Beaulieu),the 21st Wing a Filton (later Cirencester) and the 25thWing at Castle Bromwich. The Eastern GroupCommand, whose headquarters now took over theHolborn Viaduct Hotel in London, controlled the 6thWing at Maidstone, the 7th Wing in orwich, and the18th Wing in London (Duke Street, St. James). Fmally,the orthern Group Command at York looked after the8th Wing in that city, the 19th Wing at ewcastle, the23rd Wing at South Carlton and the 24th Wing at Wyton(later Spittlegate). .

Further specialist training was now becommgincreasingly necessary, if the RFC was to cope with theimproved machines and tactics of their Germanopponents. No 1 (Auxiliary) School of Aerial Gunneryat Hythe had set up q detachment at Lympne, and It wasnow proposed to move the whole unit. north to LochDoon, but this plan was aborted when It was reallsedthat the prevailing weather conditions at that location,and the proximity of the Rhinn of Kells, would seriouslyinterrupt training. Instead 0 2 School was formed atTurnberry in Ayrshire, where the infuence of the GulfStream, and the more open aspect of this seashorelocation, made conditions kinder. The Hythe schoolnow concentrated on providing Lewis gun training forobservers, while fighter pilots received gunneryinstruction at its Scottish counterpart. Schools 0 3 and4 opened later in the year, respectively at ewRomney and Marske, while a similar, but unnumbered,school formed in April at Aboukir.

With the advanced Bristol Fighter due to enterservice shortly in the two-seater fighter-reconnaiss-

ance role, increased specialist training was becomingnecessary for officers earmarked for observer duties.This was met by se ting up in January 1917 a School ofPhotography, Maps and Reconnaissance, initiallyhoused in Langham Place, London, but later atFarnborough, where the title was shortened to Schoolof Photography. Further Schools of Military Aeronauticsalso appeared during 1917, 05 being at Oxford (laterDenham) and 0 6 at Denham (later Bristol), whilst No 4introduced a new element when it formed at Torontoon 1 July as the precursor of a planned Canadiantraining scheme.

The use of the word Reserve in this area was nowbecoming something of a misnomer, and on 31 May1917 this was officially recognised when all the existingReserve Squadrons were restyled Training Squadrons.Further such schools were to form during the year, 15of these being Canadian units initially organised asnucleii within UK Training Squadrons before em­barking for expansion to full strength in their homecountry.

Training aircraf for all these new units would stillfor the most par be the same old outmoded types, plussuch few of the more modern servi.;e types as could bespared, though with one significant exception. For thefirst time a machine would become available which hadbeen specifically designed for RFC training purposes.To meet this new demand, Geoffrey de Havilland haddesigned the Airco D.H.6, a two-seater biplane ofsimple construction, which was planned from the outsetfor easy maintenance and repair. The original enginewas the 90 hp R.A.F.la, but the 90 hp Curtiss OX-5 and80 hp Renault were also fitted in some numbers,depending largely on availability. Unfortunately pro­duction was slow to get under way, mainly because ofofficial intransigence over providing suitable timberfor the frames, but once it entered service in largenumbers it was found to have few vices. Morenicknames were probably bestowed on it, however,than any other type, its double open cockpit giving riseto 'The Flying Coffin' and 'The Clumsy Hearse', or 'TheDung Hunter' by Australians who likened it to one oftheir farm vehicles. Some of the more polite alterna­tives included 'The Crab', 'The Clockwork Mouse','The Sixty', 'The Sky Hook' and 'The Clutching Hand'.

The adoption of plans for night bombing tactics inFrance from early 1917 led to the introduction of a newtype of training squadron. 0 1I RS at or holt, whichhad been responsible for all night training, moved toRochford, becoming 0 98 Depot Squadron inFebruary. 0 99 Depot Squadron formed alongside itin June, moving later in that month to East Relford, onlyto almost immediately become No 199 Depot Squadron,its senior counterpart becoming 0 198 at the sametime. This new numbering sequence was laterextended by the formation of Nos 188 to 192 DepotSquadrons, the in ervening allocations being taken by

the Egyptian-based os 193 to 197 Training Squadrons.The titles of the Depo Squadrons were brought in 0line with their daytime counterpar s on 21 December,when they were renamed (Nigh) Training Squadrons,two more of these coming into existence in April 1918,being os 186 and 187.

The most significant and far-reaching event of1917, however, was undoub edly the establishmen atGosport of the School of Special Flying. This came in 0existence on 2 August by amalgamating os 1, 27 and55 Training Squadrons there. The guiding light for thisunit was its commanding officer, Major R.R. Smith­Barry, an experienced scout pilot who had commandedNo I TS, and prior to that 60 Squadron, a unit thenfighting on the Western Front with French-builtMoranes and Nieuports. He had given much thought tofighter tactics, learning both from his own experiencesand those of his fellows. In particular, the discoveryhad gradually been made that a spin was notnecessarily fatal, i being possible to recover if thenose of the aircraft was pushed downwards.

Trick flying was now part of he curriculum, andpupils at this new school were encouraged toundertake more adventurous forms of flying, to enablehem to cope wi h all manner of difficult manoeuvres.They were aught how 0 cope wi h tricky windconditions, especially during take-off and landing, ando recover control from various unaccustomed circum­s ances induced deliberately by their instructors. Theprinciples painstakingly worked ou by the schoolwere in October 1917 embodied in an official pamphletGeneral Methods of Teaching Scout Pllots, whichbecame a bible for this new style of flying, later copiedextensively throughou the world's air forces.

Graduates from the school emerged confident oftheir own abilities, undertaking by instinct much of themanoeuvring necessary for survival, and consequentlyable to devote a much greater proportion of theirattention to their opponents. One other new devel­opment at the school towards the end of the year,which also had far-reaching consequences, was theintroduction of the 'Gosport tube', a primitive buteffective intercommunications system which for the firsttime enabled verbal exchanges in flight betweeninstructor and pupil.

Ye ano her important organisational developmentoccurred in 1917. The rapid grow h of training wasaking too big a toll of agricultural land, and thescattering of aerodromes around the country wasproving wasteful in bo h personnel and transport.Further new aerodromes were under construction, butto help minimise these problems hey were formed intoTraining Depot Sta ions, combining the asks formerlyundertaken by several sca tered Training Squadrons.The method of formation adopted was for three nucleusflights to be formed within existing Training Squa­drons, and these soon moved to the new base to be

; ;

~-.I;'. tz'1 ) •;

Martinsyde C.102 Elephant A3953 of No 22 TrainingSquadron at Aboukir, Egypt in 1917.

J.M. Bruce/C.5. Leslie collection)

BE.2e B4429 of No 31 Training Depot Station atFow1mere in 1918.

(RAF Museum Photo 0 P003688)

expanded into a TDS, which then became responsiblefor both basic and advanced raining, a sys em whichwas 0 be con inued and refined in the u ure. Thissystem was standardised throughout in July 1918 whenall surviving Training Squadrons were abolished, tobecome amalgama ed as TDSs.

Specialisation was fur her enhanced towards theend of 1917. Two Schools of Aerial Fighting were set upin the United Kingdom based a Ayr and Eastburn (nearDriffield), with a hird in Egyp at Heliopolis, and anAr illery Observa ion School was formed a Almaza,near Cairo, by redesignating 197 TS. A secondWireless School opened a Penshurst, with an Egyp iancoun erpar by the ew Year. The Wireless andObservers School at Hursley Park became he Artilleryand Infantry Co-operation School, later moving toWor hy Down where it was la er again res yled tobecome he RAF and Army Co-operation School.

Further thought had been given to training aircraftrequirements, and in November 1917 an officialSpecification was issued for an elementary ractor

Airco D.H6 A96Jl, flown by No 35 Training DepotStation at Duxford in 1918. 1n the background can beseen a hangar under construction.

(]M. Bruce/CS Leslie collection)

biplane, of similar configuration to the Avro 504 series,but powered by the new ABC Wasp engine. In heeven, this failed to result in any new design enteringservice, though a prototype was eventually flown of theBAT. Baboon to meet this requirement. Instead the 504soldiered on, alongside he newer D.H.6. The 504A andla er the 504J variant had been built in large numbers,and a new 504K appeared during 1917, to become thestandard elementary trainer for many years to come.

Meanwhile events had been moving towardsdrastic changes in the organisation of all the Britishflying services, and on 1 April 1918 this finally led tothe formation of the Royal Air Force. Of necessity, thiswas built around the structure of the Royal FlyingCorps, being by far the larger of the two air arms,which consequently had to absorb as best it could anassortment of R AS flying training units, to no littleresentment. The original naval training establishmentat Eastchurch had in the meantime been supplementedby counterparts at Cranwell, Manston, Chingford,Fairlop, East For une, Lee-on-Solent (seaplanetraming), Calshot (flying boat training), PortholmeMeadow (Oxford) and Vendome (France). All of thesewere now brought within the TDS structure, beinggiven numbers in the sequence 201 to 213.

Specialist naval needs were catered for by twoMarine Observers Schools, at Aldeburgh and

• $

Eastchurch, the first of these being originally known byits cumbersome wartime title of School for Anti­Submarine Inshore Patrol Observers. There was also aSchool for Marine Operational Pilots at Dover. 208 TDSat East Fortune was retitled the Grand Fleet School ofAerial Fighting and Gunnery, moving to Leucharswhere the word 'Grand' was dropped. A TorpedoAeroplane School equipped mainly with SopwithCuckoos was set up a East Fortune. Earlier in the yeara School of Aerial Co-operation with Coastal Artilleryhad formed at Gosport.

The Schools of Military Aeronautics had their titlesshortened to the now more suitable School ofAeronautics, fur her such schools being later formed atBath and Cheltenham. Three Schools of AerialNavigation and Bomb-dropping were formed in theUnited Kingdom, at Stonehenge, Andover and Thet­ford, and another at Almaza in Egyp, he word 'Aerial'being later omitted from the title. The various separatefighting and gunnery schools were reorganised in Mayto form three combined Schools of Fighting andGunnery, later simplified to become simply FightingSchools, these being based at Turnberry, Marske andBircham ewton. Similar schools were later set up atFreiston, and in Egypt at Heliopolis. To augment the

Bristol F2b C4879 of No 33 Training Depot Station, incolourful chequered markings at Witney in 1918.

(via Bni:m Lowe)

efforts of the Central Flying School a number of FlyingInstructors Schools were also set up, one within each ofthe new RAF Area Commands, these being based atAyr, Redcar, Shoreham, Lilbourne and Gosport, withanother in Ireland at The Curragh, and one in Egypt atEI Khanka.

This then was essentially the position on ArmisticeDay, II ovember 1918, an event which left nearly allthese units en irely surplus to any conceivable needs ofthe near fufure. Many. of the newer units had barelybegun to function, let alone provide trained fightingmen to the operational squadrons. The main problemnow was to organise an orderly rundown, yet retainsufficient hard won expertise to maintain the basicefficiency of this newly formed service which had notyet begun to think as one combined whole, with manyofficers and men still wearing the uniforms of theirformer services to which many of hem, particularly{hose with naval backgrounds, felt, and would continueto feel, a continued allegiance.

Chapter 3u[hJ@[F@~~(Q)~

W@@~

T he beginning of 1919 saw the junior service witha motley assor ment of raining uni s, themajority of which would be gone by the end

of hat year. 0 longer would it be necessary tomaintain a scattered series of Training Depot Stationsaround the country, and a start was soon made onrunning hese down. Many were disbanded in the earlypart of the year, and the remaining dozen or so werereduced to Training Squadron status, though retainingtheir former TDS identity numbers. The only excep ion

was 16 TDS at Abu Sueir in Egypt, which kept i s TDSstatus, later moving to Heliopolis.

Quite a number of the specialist schools remainedin existence a hat stage, though consolidated andreorganised during the year, and the naval side wasrun down quite drastically. The various Observers'Schools were closed, as was the Fleet School of AerialFighting and Gunnery at Leuchars, but 209 TDS atLee-on-Solen became the RAF and aval Co-opera ionSchool and later the RAF Seaplane Es ablishment. AtGosport the Coastal Battery Co-operation Schoolbecame the Coastal Battery Co-operation Flight.

A major reorganisa ion of both aircrew andground crew raining became effective from 23December. The RAF and Army Co-operation School atWorthy Down became the School of Army Co­operation, b-ased at Andover, the School of Air Pilotagebecame the Air Pilotage School, and the Electrical and

Sopwith Snipe £6150 of No 1 Flying Training School atNetheravon in 1921.

(RAF Museum Photo No P008l70)

Wireless School formed at Flower Down by renamingNo I (Training) Wireless School. The Boys TrainingDepot at Halton became the School of TechnicalTraining (Boys). The Cadet College, Cranwell was

• ; ; ; ., '1 ) •;

Above:De HavlJland D.H.9A (Dual control) £797 of No 1FlyingTrammg School at Netheravon in 1921.

(RAF Museum Photo No P008l73)

res yled the RAF (Cade) College, the Cen ral FlyingSchool at Upavon became the Flying Instructors School,and the Photographic Park at Farnborough became theSchool of Pho ography. A portent for the future was theformation at Netheravon on 23 December of 0 1Flying Training School from the short-lived etheravonFlying School.

One legacy of the wartime growth was thatresponsibility for training was spread across severalarea commands, and this si ua ion continued for a time,In the South-Eastern Area, No I (Training) Groupheadquarters were initially in London, moving out toCroydon in August 1919, whilst 02 (Training) Groupheadquarters was based in Southampton until itdisbanded. In the orthern Area, 0 3 (Training)Group was at Oxford until moving in mid-year toUxbridge, reducing to a skeleton in December 1919,hen disbanding on 15 March 1920. In the Sou hWestern Area, 0 7 (Training) Group was based aSalisbury and later Andover, whilst No 8 (Training)Group at Cambridge moved to Norwich in July, then on10 ovember to Spittlega e. 0 7 Wing was based atCoal Aston and 0 8 Wing at York and later Marske,both of these later going 0 Uxbridge,

This rationalisation continued into 1920, tocomplete the basic post-war training structure, The

Below:Gloster Grebe IIIDC]7520 of the Central Flying Schoolat Wittering, bearing Racing No 23 for the Kings CupAir Race in July 1928. It won the following year's race,

(RAF Museum Photo No P008384)

Armstrong Whitworth Siskin IIIDC J9198 of 'E' Flight,RAF Trammg Base at Leuchars in 1929.

(RAF Museum Photo No P004294)

Aerial avigation School formed in February atCalshot, soon being enlarged to become the School of

aval Co-operation and Aerial Navigation, moving inAugus 0 Lee-on-Solent. The Torpedo TrainingSquadron a Gospor became 0 210 (TorpedoTrammg) Squadron in February, The School of ArmyCo-operation closed down at Worthy Down on 8March, but immediately reopened at Stonehenge wi h adetachmen at Worthy Down, The various schools oftechnical training were reorganised and renamed, toleave Nos 1 and 2 Schools of Technical Training (Boys)Home at Halton and Cranwell respectively and Schoolof Technical Training (Men) Home a Eastchurch (laterManston),

o 2 (Training) Group disbanded in March, itsremaining stations being transferred to No 1 Groupbut this was followed by a more fundamen aiadministrative change with the formation on I April ofInland Area, WI h headquar ers at Hillingdon House,Uxbndge. This new organisation took over from theformer orthern and Southern Area Commands, and at

schools, In February 1928, herefore, RAF BaseLeuchars took over initial training for naval officers, atask which had previously been performed by 1 FTS,and two mon hs later 3 FTS reformed with 504 sandSiskin fighters at RAF Grantham, this being the newname for Spittlegate, Further new types were at lastbeginning to reach these schools, with 5 FTS receivingMoths In 1929, whilst Tomtits were given to 3 FTS, TheCFS replaced its Grebes with Bulldogs in February1931, and the following month its D.H.9As gave way toFairey IIIFs. The need for an additional FTS had by thenpassed, and 1FTS was consequently disbanded,leaving an awkward gap at the beginning of thenumbering system. The Seaplane Training Flight atCalshot was uprated In October to become theSeaplane Training Squadron, now f1ying Southamptonf1ying boats and IIIF f1oatplanes.

Armament training, which had played a fairlyminor role since the war, now began 0 assume agreater importance. At the beginning of 1932 theArmament and Gunnery School at Eastchurch becamethe Air Armament School, using Wapitis, IIIFs andBulldogs. Three existing Practice Camps became os1, 2 and 3 Armament Training Camps, formedrespectively at Catfoss, North Coa es Fitties and SuttonBridge.

Output of qualified pIlots from the Flying TrainingSchools by now amounted to around 300 each year.Permanent officers received their training at the RAFCollege, while the FTSs trained shor service officersand airmen pilots,

During 1933 the Air Pilotage School formed atAndover, f1ying Victorias, Tutors and later Clouds. Anelement of the Armament and Gunnery School atEastchurch broke away to become the Coastal DefenceTraining Flight at Gosport, with IIIFs, this soon beingsub-divided to form os 1, 2 and 3 CDT Flights atGosport, equipped respectively with IIIFs, Vildebeestsand Harts. They re-amalgamated two years later,however, to become No 1 Coastal Defence TrainingUnit. 2 FTS disbanded in July 1933 a Digby, butreformed there just over a year later wi h Tutors, Hartsand Furies,

~_..t'•~ :

; ;

Right:Fairey IJIF MkllJB (DC) S1847 of RAF Training Base atLeuchars around 1934.

(MAP photo)

Below:Avro Tutor K3248 '6' of No 5 Flying Training School atSealand.

(RAF Museum Photo No P006304)

administered by Inland Area, which itself moved on 20May 0 Bentley Priory, Stanmore, but it now took overresponsibility for all home-based raining estab­lishments.

Training equipment was still much the same, withone significant exception, his being the receipt by theCentral Flying School, soon to move to Wittering, of itsfirst Avro 504 , or Lynx-Avro as it was generallyknown. Though no substitute for a new purpose-builttrainer, the fi ment of a Lynx engine and an oleoundercarriage gave the machine an extra lease of life,and over the course of the next two years this versiongradually replaced the old war ime 504K in all thef1ying training units, A he CFS, wartime Snipe fighterswere beginning to give way to Gamecocks andGrebes.

There were a few more changes among thetraining units, The Air Pilotage Flight at Calshot wasrenamed the Navigation School in 1926, new Southamp­ton f1ying boats replacing the former Felixstowe F.5s.The RAF (Cadet) College changed its title in February1929 to become simply the RAF College, being joinedshortly afterwards at Cranwell by the Electrical andWireless School.

By now, sufficient new pilot recruits were beingaccepted for the intake to overstrain the existing

Blackburn B.2 G-ACEN of No 4 Elementary andReserve Flying Training School at Brough.

(R.D. Cooling)

in 1921 when No 3 (Training) Group merged into No 1Group, bu this situa ion was reversed in February1922 when 0 11 Wing reformed at Spittlegate to takeover all the units of the former 0 3 Group, thesituation moving full circle when this wing in turnbecame a new No 3 (Training) Group in May 1923.However, f1ying training needs had proved minimaLand both 3 FTS and 6 FTS disbanded in April 1922,Around the same time, the School of Aerial Gunneryand Bombing a Eastchurch was renamed theArmament and Gunnery SchooL equipped wi h Snipes,Bristol Fighters and DH,9As, and a small communi­cations element for the RAF Saff College formed atAndover. A minor change later was he move of 2 FTSto Digby in June 1924.

Coastal training was still in a state of metamorpho­sis, and during 1923 an RAF Base formed at Calshot, toinclude both a Seaplane Training Fligh and an AirPilotage Flight, and at Lee-on-Solent the SeaplaneTraining School became the School of Naval Co­opera ion. Leuchars was reconstituted as an RAFTraining Base in July 1925, responsible for trainingnaval personnel. It then had three f1ights comprising'A' (Fighter) Training Flight equipped with Flycatchers,504Ks, and dual control Grebes and Siskins, 'B'(Spotter) Training Flight with Bisons and Blackburns,and 'C' (Reconnaissance) Training Flight f1ying FaireyIIIDs. 'D' (Torpedo Training) Flight formed at RAF BaseGosport at the same time, equipped with Darts.

A further rationalisation of f1ying training adminis­tration occurred on 12 April 1926. No 1 Group nowbecame No 21 Group and ceased to have any trainingresponsibility. No 3 Group was similarly redesignated,to become 0 23 Group, which shortly moved out fromSpittlegate to take up residence at St Vincents,Grantham. The new 23 Group continued to be

• $

a stroke the remnants of the labyrinthine wartimes ructure was dismantled to give a prac ical basis forpeacetime air operations in the Uni ed Kingdom. It wasgiven a wide range of responsibili ies, which includedcontrol of Nos 1, 3 and 7 (Training) Groups, as well as

os 7 and 8 Wings. For he first time, RAF home f1yingtraining was to be administered by a single body.

The first fruits of this were quickly seen, when on26 April all he remaining Training Schools wereredesignated to become Flying Training Schools. 0 1Flying Training School was already in existence within7 Group at Netheravon, 3 Group now took over 2 FTS(formerly 31 TS) at Duxford (otherwise Royston), 3 FTS(formerly 59 TS) at Scopwick (renamed Digby) and6 FTS (formerly 30 TS) at Spittlegate (later Manston). In7 Wing, 4 TS at Shotwick (renamed Sealand) became5 FTS, but there was no longer any justification for 8and 9 Wings, and they consequently disbanded. 0

new types of aircraft were likely to be available forsome time, so these units had to soldier on withwar ime aircraft, many of them reconditioned, such as504Ks, DH,9As, Bristol Figh ers and Snipes, and also afew Vimys in the case of 6 FTS, The gap in thisnumbering sequence was accounted for by theEgypt-based 4 FTS, which formed the following year atAbu Sueir with fairly similar equipment, includingVimys. At Upavon, the Central Flying School reformedin No 7 Group, also with similar types of aircraft. ASchool of Aerial Gunnery and Bombing came intoexistence during the year at Eastchurch,

At that time, Britain still had a widespread Empire,and the RAF was soon being called upon to meetoperational commitments in a number of places.Ireland was troubled, and there were problems in theMiddle East and the Far East, Post-war economies leftfew resources, and the emphasis in both aircrewselec ion and training had of necessity to be on quality,within a framework suitable for rapid expansion shouldthe necessity arise. Tasks were doubled up whereverpossible, thus, for instance, the absence of specialschools for advanced f1ying training was overcome bymaking the first-line squadrons responsible for trainingnewly f1edged pilots. Similarly, air gunners andobservers were drawn from the better technicaltradesmen, who could consequently perform a dualrole. The pay bill was kept down by selecting suitable

COs for f1ying training, hese becoming sergeantpilots who later returned to their parent trades.

The School of Army Co-operation moved in 1921 toOld Sarum, and No 2 School of Technical Training(Boys) Home became the Boys Wing, Cranwell. AtGosport, an Observer Training Flight was formed, andat nearby Lee-on-Solent, the School of aval Co­operation and Aerial Navigation became the SeaplaneTraining School. In India, a small RAF School wasformed.

The controlling organisation was further reduced

• .... ; [

~-.!.: h'1 ?3R;

By this time talk of expansion was in the air. It hadbeen a basic presumption since 1919 that there wouldbe no major war for ten years, and all forward planninghad been based on this. Events in Europe now madethis theory increasingly untenable, and on 23 March1932, the Cabinet finally decided that this 'Ten YearRule' should be abolished. It took some time to givepractical effect to the decision, but the Annual Estimatesof March 1934 authorised an increase in first linesquadron strength, and this had inevitable conse­quences for the training organisation.

First of all, some hing fairly drastic had to be doneto increase the flow of new recruits Fortunately therewas already in existence a nucleus which could be builtupon for initial training, four civilian training schoolsfor reservists having been set up as far back as 1923.The Director of Training now decided that theelementary training of all pupil pilots should beentrus ed to such civilian schools. This would leave theFTSs free to concentrate on more advanced training,which in turn would relieve the training burden on thefirst line squadrons.

The new civilian schools were to be known asElementary amd Reserve Flying Training Schools, and

o I formed at Hatfield on 4 Augus 1935, with GipsyMoths and later Tiger Moths, from the de Havilland­operated reserve school there, originally opened inMay 1923 at Stag Lane. The next three, in numericalorder, formed from he 0 her reserve schools at Filton,Hamble and Brough, were operated respectively byhe Bristol Aeroplane Company, Air Service Training

Ltd and the orth Sea Aerial and General TransportCompany. The last-named was taken over the followingyear by Blackburn Aircraft, which then ran it withlocally-built Blackburn B.2s.

Another source of partially-trained pilots was thethree University Air Squadrons, hose for Cambridgeand Oxford having already been in existence since1925, giving flying instruction from 1928 in 504 s atDuxford and Abingdon respectively to pupils fromthose universities. New equipment in the shape ofTutors was now becoming available for these, and inOctober 1935 the two existing squadrons were joinedby the similarly-equipped University of London AirSquadron based at Northolt, this having also a fewAtlases.

A further nine reserve schools were nowauthorised, and the first two formed on I June,5 E&RFTS with B.2s at Hanworth being initially run byFlying Training Ltd, until taken over by Blackburns,whilst Brooklands Aviation opened 6 E&RFTS at Sywellwith the more usual Tiger Moths. Contrac procedurescould be lengthy, however, and only three more suchschools materialised before the year end.

The slack in the service schools could now be putto good use. Firs the numerical gap was filled in April1935 when RAF Base Leuchars was retitled to become

I FTS, still for Fleet Air Arm officer training, by now onIIIFs, Seals and Harts. Simultaneously, 6 FTS reformedat Netheravon with Tutors and Harts, and six monthslater II FTS opened at Wittering with Harts, Audaxesand Tutors At the end of the year 7 FTS opened atPeterborough with Harts and Tutors, and 10 FTS atTernhill operating Harts, Audaxes and Tutors. All theFTSs were now reorganised so that pupils stayed withthem for two erms, the first being devoted to flyingtraining (or intermediate training as it was renamed in1937), and the second to advanced training. Coursesoverlapped, with a new course being accepted everythree months, each FTS being fed with pupils byspecified E&RFTSs, for continuity.

A few other changes in 1935 included therenaming of the Air Pilotage School at Andover as theAir avigation School, using Prefects, and the openingof a Temporary Armament Training Camp at LeucharsThe School of Technical Training (Men) at Manstonbecame No 3 S of TT, and in September the CentralFlying School returned to its traditional home atUpavon.

By 1936, with the political situation in Europes eadily worsening, the RAF was at las beginning toget some of the equipment it would need if it were tobe able to carry out its duties effectively in a new-stylewar. Large and more modern types of aircraft werenow coming into service, and except in the single­seaters the pilot could no longer be expected to beresponsible also for navigation and in many instancesbomb-dropping. It was therefore decreed that the crewof a bomber or two-seater fighter should be one pilotand one observer, plus a wireless operator and/or airgunner where necessary. In the case of coastal aircraftthe crew would comprise one pilot plus a navigatorwho should also be a qualified pilot. Bombers wouldhave two pilots wherever possible.

This immediately presented problems, as thespecialist training schools had largely vanished in 1919,and modern counterparts would now have to be set up.The first of these WqS to be an Air Observers School,opened at orth Coates Fit ies in January 1936 withGordons and Wallaces, this being quickly followed bycombining the Air Navigation School at Andover withthe avigation School from Calshot to form a newSchool of Air Navigation at Manston equipped withAnsons, hese latter aircraft being joined soon by theSaro Cloud flight of the Seaplane Training Squadron.

Further E&RFTSs appeared early in 1936, and byFebruary the initial target of 13 such schools inoperation had been achieved. In addition, 9 FTSformed at Thornaby in March with Harts, Furies andTutors. The whole administrative structure, however,was by now beginning to creak from overloading.During the formative years of the RAF, most majorfunctions had of necessity been retained by the AirMinistry, but devolution was now highly overdue.

Fortunately the lessons of the earlier conflict had notbeen los, there being many senior officers still inservice from that period, and it was decided torecreate a structure essentially similar 0 that whichhad been gradually dismantled in the early twenties.The Air Ministry would therefore in future beresponsible only for policy-making, and its dietatswould then be carried out through a chain starting withCommands and progressing downwards throughGroups, Stations and Units. The existing AreaCommands would cease to exist, to be superseded byspecialised Bomber, Coastal, Figh er and TrainingCommands.

_ Accordingly, Inland Area was renamed TrainingCommand on I May, and 0 23 Group was henrestyled No 23 (Training) Group. A further reorgani­satIOn took place mJuly, and the control of all technicaltraining units then became he responsibility of a newNo 24 (Training) Group at Halton. Bentley Priory wasnow needed for he new Fighter Command headquar­ters' which had to be near the centre of likely activities,and consequently Training Command headquartersmoved out on 13 July to take up residence atBuntingsdale Hall, Market Drayton.

On paper, herefore, the RAF now had a trainingstructure better able to see that this vital function wasproperly executed. In practice, however, as is so oftenthe case, the new organisation was slow to settle down,and consequently it did not become properly effectiveuntIl early 1938. Training Command, instead of being abrand new organisation WIth a closely definedobjec ive, had taken over Inland Area virtually intact,mcludmg an assortment of scattered units having noconceIvable bearing on flying training. Worse, far toofew staff. could be spared to run such a large neworgamsa IOn. On the other hand it ought to have takenover a number of maritime training units operated bythe new Coastal Command, but this task was to remainwithin tha command, controlled by 0 17 (Training)Group. The eventual solution to most of the problemswas to hIve off many of its duties to new TechnicalTraining, Reserve and Maintenance Commands, butthat took some time to plan and accomplish.

One of the components of Training Command wasthe Armament Group, which had formed in 1934 atEastchurch to control the Air Armament School and theArmament Training Camps. The latter were steadilymcreased m number as newer and larger aircraft cameinto service, and by early 1938 there were seven inoperation. In November 1937 the Air Armament Schoolat Eastchurch was redesignated 0 I AAS, and a new

o 2 AAS formed at orth Coates Fitties, where itabsorbed the units already based there, including theAIr Observers School. The parent administration wasbrough within the numbering system in December1937 when it changed its name from Armament Groupto 0 25 (Armament Training) Group.

Afurther 20 reserve schools had meanwhile beenauthorised, the first of these coming into operation inJuly 1937 at Castle Bromwich, Redhill and Shoreham.Advanced training had now been added to theircurriculum, and the Tiger Moths, Magisters and othertypes were being augmented, mostly by Hart variants,but also later by some Battles and Ansons. The task ofcontrolling this growing number of schools had untilnow been the responsibility of a Superintendent ofReserve and an Inspector of Civil Flying TrainingSchools, and their respective staffs, but these could notbe expected to cope with such a rapidly increasingburden, and on I December a new No 26 (Training)Group was formed at Hendon to take over thisresponsibility.

There were a number of changes of location ofFlying Training Schools around this time, but the onlynew one to appear was 12 FTS which formed atGrantham in December 1938 with Harvards, Harts andAnsons. 23 Group headquarters moved from StVincents to Grantham (Spi tlegate) aerodrome on 2October.

The year of 1938 was to be one of great changes. InJanuary the School of aval Co-operation moved fromLee-on-Solent to the new aerodrome at Ford, by nowusmg modern types of naval aircraft such as Sharks,Swordfishes and Walruses. A pressing need for airgunners and observers could not be properly me onmadequate resources, and proposals for a series ofAOSs had therefore to be postponed, though it waspossible to create 0 I Air Observers School at orthCoates Fitties by retitling 2 AAS. Immediate needswere met by forming a temporary Air ObserversSchool with Heyfords at Leconfield in June, thisdlsbandmg at the end of the year. A change of title inApril saw Armament Training Camps restyledArmament Training Stations. A new 2 AAS formed atEastchurch in July, and in August I AAS moved fromEastchurch to a new airfield at Manby. 7 ATS atAcklington became 2 AOS on 15 November. During1939 further changes included he renaming of 2 ATSAcklington and 4 ATS West Freugh to become 2 AOSand 4 AOS respectively.

ew specialist units formed in 1938. A School ofGeneral Reconnaissance opened at Thomey Isla'ndWIth Ansons, and a Floatplane Traming School formedat Calshot. The RAF Staff College closed in September,and the Electrical and Wireless School became I E&WSin November to prepare the way for the forma ion inthe New Year of 2 E&WS at Yatesbury with Dominies.

. Many more new reserve schools also appeareddunng that year. In addition, those which had an Ansonelement for naviga ion raining now had these breakaway to form separate Civil Air Navigation Schools, thefirst four being based respectively at Prestwick,Yatesbury, Desford and Ansty. 23 Group had by nowgrown too bIg to perform all its tasks effectively, and at

the end of the year a new No 21 (Training) Groupformed at Cranwell to take over responsibility for RAFCranwell, the RAF College, 1 E&WS, 5 FTS and latersome of the other FTSs Asimilar problem was affectingcontrol of the reserve schools, and early in 1939Reserve Command was formed, No 28 Group beingretitled No 50 (Training) Group, and a new No 51(Training) Group taking over responsibility for E&RFTSs in the Midlands and the North, with newE&RFTSs and CANSs continuing to be formed right upto the outbreak of war.

Three new Scottish-based regular schools alsoformed within 21 Group during the early part of 1939,

being Nos 13, 14 and 15 respectively at Drem, Kinlossand Lossiemouth. The use of monoplanes at theseestablishments was becoming standard with the issueof Oxfords, and American-built Harvards.

To fill the gap between FTS and squadron, severalGroup Pools were set up in each of the operationalcommands to provide advanced training on modernaircraft for both pilots and crews. Coastal Command,however, lost all its responsibilites for naval trainingwhen this was taken over by the Admiralty on 24 May1939, this reversing events of 21 years earlier.

The scene was now set for war, with a wide varietyof training units in being, and others planned.

Chapter 4u[Fu@(Q)0lJ~ ~@ [U]@[Fu1t(Q)~ Wfl!j@IJ

T he. outbreak of war immediately led to a hastyratIOnalisatIOn of the training structure. TheReserve aspect of the E&RFTSs was

dropped overnight, all those not actually in fulloperation were closed, and the remainder, drasticallypruned m number, were brought within the main­stream RAF structure as Elementary Flying TrainingSchools, though contmumg to be operated by civilianfirms. Pupils would still carryon to the Flying TrainingSchools, but these now became Service Flying TrainingSchools, mcludmg 4 FTS in Egypt, which now moved toIraq to become 4 SFTS at Habbaniya. Several of theother UK units moved, generally to make way foroperatIOnal squadrons.

The south and east coast aerodromes would nowbe required for defensive and offensive operations byfirst Ime squadrons, and were in any event toovulnerable to be used for training purposes. TheSeaplane Training Squadron went north from Calshot toInvergordon, and several of the armament schools leftfor safer locations, taking up war stations in Wales,Scotland, Ireland or the West Country. They werereorganised at the same time, so that all now becameAir Observers Schools, providing navigation, bombingand gunnery training for observers, and also gunnerytrammg for alr gunners. In their new coastal locationsthey could carry out firing practice, generally over theIrish Sea and its environs, with a minimal fear ofinterruption by the enemy.

. .The standard of both navigation and air gunnerytrammg left a lot to be desired at this time. To helpremedy thIS, the pre-war civilian-operated CANSswere consequently transformed into Air Observer andNavigator Schools, and their instructors mobilised intothe RAF. At the same time, the navigation training taskwas wIthdrawn from existing regular units, and severalof the observer schools were then used as the basis fornew Bombing and Gunnery Schools. In addition, aCentral Gunnery School was set up at Warmwell toattempt to overcome the scarcity of gunnery leaders,which. was causing considerable difficulty in theoperatIOnal commands.

In Scotland, the aerodrome at Drem was now

Faliey Battle Trainer conversion.(Official)

included not only EFTSs and SFTSs, but also suchothers as SA s, AOSs, B&GSs, OTUs and also Schools ofGeneral Reconnaissance. The depar ure of hese unitsenabled the vacated aerodromes to become availableeither for operational purposes, or for operationaltraining.

The B&GSs were phased out during 194 I, and theirplaces taken by more specialised Air Gunnery Schools,attached 0 which were special target towing flights.Around the same time, more attention was being givento radio communica ion and the use of new elec ronicdevices. This led to the replacement of the Electricaland Wireless Schools by a seres of new SignalsSchools and Radio Schools.

Heavy losses being incurred in daylight operationsby Bomber Command led to a switch to night raids.These brought their own hazards, particularly onreturn, and techniques therefore had to be developedto combat this. No I Blind Approach School wastherefore set up in September 1940 at Watchfield andthis was followed by a series of Blind ApproachTraining Flights attached to those advanced flyingschools which were turning out bomber pilo s. The useof radar beams by these units was later recognised intheir titles, which in October 1941 were changed to

Bristol Beaufort J Nlll3 'Dl' of No 3 (Coastal)Operational TrainIng Unit at Cranwellin 1942.

(via A.S. Thomas)

., lF1;' •"'--".51;

pilots. They continued to use ageing Hart variants andBattles, as the newer Ansons and Oxfords would berequired for shipment to the Dominions, where anEmpire Air Training Scheme was beginning 0 getunder way, which would take over many of theresponsibilities for training both British and Dominionpilots and crews.

The rapid increase in training units was once moreproving too great for the existing adminis rativestructure, and on 27 May 1940 Training Command wassplit. In its place came Flying Training Command andTechnical Training Command. The former comprised21 and 23 Groups looking after advanced flyingtraining, whilst 51 Group controlled the elementarytraining units and 54 Group was responsible forrecrUi s.

The Central Flying School was now finding itselfunable to cope with the vas ly increased demands forqualified instructors, and this problem was me bysetting up special Flying Instructors Schools. One ofthese, 2 FIS at Cranwell, was later designated No 2Central Flying School, the original CFS at Upavon thenbecoming 0 1CFS.

From the late summer of 1940, several schoolswere shipped intact to one or other of the Dominions,to get the Empire Air Training Scheme, or BritishCommonwealth Air Training Plan to give it the officialtltle, off he ground. Canada was particularly notable inthis respect, bu many schools were also set up in SouthAfrica, Australia and Southern Rhodesia. These

....

_.....:-. - ....-0-

Left:Blackburn Botha JL6250 'IF' of No 3 School of GeneralReconnaissance at Squires Gate in 1942.

(MAP photo)

Below: -Armstrong Whitworth Whitley V N1503 'M' of No 19Operational Training Unit at Kinloss in 1944.

(RAF Museum Photo No P017820)

The success of the OTU system was sufficient tojustify its ex ension overseas, and accordingly a TransitUnit Reserve Pool at Ismailia, in the Egyptlan CanalZone, was restyled 70 (Middle East) OTU at the end of1940. This initially had both a bomber and fighterelement, but the latter broke away in 1941 to form71 OTU, and several more of these units later formed inhe Eastern Medi erranean. The following year theywere supplemented by a number of Middle EastTraining Schools, giving different ypes of speclahsedcourses. OTUs were also formed in India.

A the beginning of 1940, plans were laid duringthe so-called 'Phoney War' period for several FTSs 0be formed in France, to be located in the Vendomearea, some distance south of Paris, though in the eventthis intention was overtaken by events. At home, therewere sufficient refugee Pole volunteers for a PolishTraining and Grading Flight to be set up at Kingstown.The number of Polish recruits later became suffiCient tojustify special facili ies, and the following year heNot ingham area received both 25 (Pohsh) EFTS aHucknall and 16 (Polish) SFTS a ewton. In additIOn aPolish Training Unit formed at Hucknall, la er becoming16 (Polish) OTU, and moving 0 Bramco e and thenFinningley before being merged into 10 OTU towardsthe end of the war, by which time the supply of Pollshrecruits had dropped to much smaller numbers.

The nature of the SFTSs had begun to change byearly 1940. Ins ead of being of a general nature, theywere now ca egorised, hose clasSified as Group Iaccep ing only pupils earmarked as po ential fighterpilo s, whilst Group II schools took future bomber

:-.

required for figh er opera ions over the or h Sea, andherefore could no longer be occupied by 13 FTS.Instead of being moved this um was disbanded and ItSresources spread among several similar units, of whichthere were now fourteen in operation m the UmtedKingdom For similar, and even more cogent, reasons,the School of Air aVlgatlOn at Manston was alsoclosed, its ask being aken over by the Group Pool~.

A significan proportion of Bomber Command sresources were now being devo ed 0 trammg. SIX eensquadrons were under the con rol of 0 6 (Trammg)Group, and soon af er he ou break of war . heseemulated the example already set by FighterCommand, by pairing into Group. Pools, thoughsquadrons still retained their separate Identltles wlthmthe pools. As their titles suggested, they acted as poolsfrom which operational squadrons were able to drawreplacement aircrew, and these could hus relmqUishtheir own raining role to concentra e entlrely on theirmain purpose. The outpu from each pool wasearmarked for a specific Group, and flew similaraircraft so that crews would already be expenenced onhese. This system was not entirely. satisfac ory,however, and in the spring of 1940 all eXlstmg GroupPools were redesignated Opera ional Trammg Umts,those in Bomber Command ceasing to have componentsquadrons

1tz'12,;~-"Ii.Righ:Hawker Hurricane I Z479l 'H-33' of the Empire CentralFlymg School at Hullavington, accompanied by twoSpitfIre 11As of the same unit, in September 1942.

(RAF Museum Photo No P100360l)

Below:Supermarine SpitfIre VC's ]K926 '1' and MA681 '2' off~f3 Operational Training Unit at Fayid, in Egypt,

(MAP photo)

Bottom:Vickers Wellington IA N2887 :5' of the Central GunnerySchool at Sutton Bndge m fIghter affIliation exercisewith North American Mustang I in 1943

(RAF Museum Photo No P00953l)

• $

not only would the aircraft with which they wereequipped have no suitable WIT equipment, but theunits would lack the necessary trained and suitablepilots. Instead, therefore, several of the Air ObserversSchools were reorganised as (Observer) AdvancedFlying Units, manned by staff pilots, and with no groundtraining element in the course.

In March 1942 it was decided to economise in theuse of bomber pilots, and the second pilot wasdispensed with, but to compensate for this the standardof training for bomber pilots was raised at the sametime. There was also concern abou the general level ofwastage from the schools, and in an attempt to reducethis the PNB (Pilot, avigator, Air Bomber) Scheme wasintroduced, in which only good quality trainees wouldbe selected, rather than continue to expend invaluableresources on a large number of recruits, many ofwhom would fall by the wayside during their courses.

Around the same time, the old title of Observerbecame obsolete, to be replaced by the Navigator,who would now no longer be concerned in the firstinstance with weapon training, but would concentratepurely on aircraft navigation. Having completed thebasic course, he might then be given additionaltraining to fit him for the particular role he wasexpected to fill. If he was likely to be posted to light ormedium bombers, torpedo bombers or flying boats, hewould have to go on to qualify as an Air Bomber, and ifsuccessful would become a Navigator (B). In similarfashion, a avigator (R) would have taken an AI radarcourse to qualify him for night fighters, whilst WIToperator training would be required for a avigator(W) on intruders, long-range fighters, torpedo patrolmachines or photo-reconnaissance aircraft.

Another significant development at this time wasthe disbandment of the original Central Flying School,and the formation in its place of the Empire CentralFlying School. The gradual dispersal of expertise to themany different flying training schools at home andabroad was giving rise to local variations in trainingmethods,- and this CQuid be particularly dangerous withheavier and faster types of aircraft entering service.The new school, situated at Hullavington, wouldtherefore co-ordinate training policy, so that the latestoperational flying techniques could be taught uni­formly.

The scope of Operational Training Units wasincreased in 1943 with the formation of the firstTransport OTUs. These initially flew Wellingtons, butas the supply of American-built Dakotas built up, theyswitched over to that type, and crews were able topractise the kind of flying which would be required ofthem once they reached an airborne transport orglider towing squadron. These units were all eventu­ally upgraded to Conversion Units specialising indifferent aspects of the transport role, later equipmentincluding Halifax transports and Yorks.

Beam Approach, being then renumbered in a new1500-series of designations.

With the large numbers of aircraft now beingreceived from the United States, plus those beingturned out in quantity from UK production linefactories, there was an increasing need for pilotscapable of delivering these machines to the varioustheatres of war where they were needed. In October1941, therefore, a Ferry Training Unit was formed atHoneybourne, the first of thirteen of these units,including one in Canada.

One new type of aerial warfare, dramatically usedby the Germans in the invasion of Crete, was the use ofgliders. The RAF was slow to adopt their use but, aftersome limited work at Ringway, several Glider TrainingSchools were set up during 1941 and 1942 in the Oxfordarea, equipped with Hotspur training gliders, thesebeing towed initially by Hart variants, and later by aglider tug adaptation of the Miles Master pilot trainer.When the larger Horsa glider entered service innumbers the following year, the first of several HeavyGlider Conversion Units was set up.

The training of bomber crews by the OTUs wasworking satisfactorily by mid-1941, and in a number ofcases it had been possible to send aircraft from theseunits on actual raids. A new complication then arose,however, with the impending introduction into serviceof large new bombers in the shape of twin-enginedManchesters and four-engined Halifaxes, Stirlings,Liberators and Lancasters. It was not consideredpracticable to issue these to Bomber OTUs and initiallythe squadrons found themselves reverting to theformer situation of having to take responsibility for thefinal stages of training. They were able to ease thesituation a little by forming separate conversion flights,sometimes detached to a satellite aerodrome to relievecongestion, but this was not en irely satisfactory, and inearly 1941 the existing conversion flights were formedinto quite separate Conversion Units.

By 1942 advance flying training and crew trainingwas being largely provided by the Dominion schools.Whilst this relieved much of the burden on thehome-based units, it provided a rather fluctuatingsupply of men who had carried ou all their training inconditions vastly different from those they were soon toencounter. To help solve this problem, most of thesurviving UK-based SFTSs were restyled as (Pilot)Advance Flying Units, with the primary task of gettingpilots accustomed to the British terrain and rapidlychanging weather conditions, as well as a busierairspace and the hazards of a total blackout. They couldalso be used as a pool of trainees, to act as a bufferbetween the uncertain intake, and the equally variableneeds of the squadrons. It was envisaged originally thatthese units would also provide similar acclimatisationfor observers, with a special four week course beforejoining their units. It was soon realised, however, that

I .

-..,--*

Among other specialised units, the Staff PilotsTraining Unit was formed in March 1942 at Cark to trainpilots in day and night flying prior to their joining AOSsand (O)AFUs as staff pilots. At the end of that year No 1Specialised Low Attack Instructors School formed atMilfield, to provide instruction on Hurricanes in the useof rocket projectiles and cannon, a form of warfarealready being successfully practised in the WesternDesert. This was followed by the introduction of theFighter Leaders School at Aston Down, to providepotential fighter squadron commanders with spe­cialised tactical training. This specialism was taken astage further in October 1943, when several of theexisting fighter OTUs were restyled Tactical ExerciseUnits, to provide practical combat training to fighterpilots.

The efforts of such units eventually culminated inOctober 1944 in the formation of the Central FighterEstablishment at Wittering. This combined the variousmiscellaneous elements of advanced training forfighter pilots with the development of fighter techni­ques. It was equipped with all the latest contemporaryfighters, including Spitfire, Typhoon and Tempest day

Short Stirling 1J1 LK508 'U3' of the Central NavigationSchool at Shawbury in 1944.

(RAF Museum Phuto No P015673)

fighters and Beaufighter and Mosquito night fighters, aswell as having three flying classrooms in the shape ofAI-equipped Wellingtons.

By the beginning of 1944 the Commonwealthscheme had largely served its purpose, and wasbeginning to run down, and their duties returned to theUK. Consequently the (P) AFUs soon began to give wayto new S~TSs and FTSs With the prospect looming ofvictory in Europe, FJreparations began for continuingthe war in the Far East. Particular emphasis was placedon tactical training, and as the number of bomberHeavy Conversion Units dwindled, their places weretaken by various transport Conversion Units, ready forthe battles which were thought to lie ahead in the FarEast. All this proved unnecessary, however, with thedropping of the first atom bombs, and the capitulationof Japan.

Chapter 5UmJ®[P)(Q)~=W@[J

W®@rnA s in 1918jl9, the end of the Second World War

saw a massIve rundown m the trainingorganisation during 1945(46. The advent of

modern aircraft, however, particularly jets, meant thateven at a much reduced level, a more comprehensivetraining orgamsation would be necessary than hadbeen reqUlred mthe mter-war years. The difficulty wasto determine exactly what form of structure would berequired in the long term, and various formulae havebeen tried over the last four decades.

Many of the numerous specialist wartime training

units would serve no useful purpose in a drasticallyreduced orgamsatlOn. TheIr function was either totallyunnecessary or could be mcorporated more economi­cally in the remit of other units, whose scope wouldthen become more comprehensive.

. There was the added problem of retainingsufficIent tramed personnel to run both first line andsupport units. By the end of the war most RAFpersonnel were members of the Volunteer Reserveand as such were simply waiting for their demobili~sation number to come up, so that they could return toclvll1an hfe and do their best to forget all about theirwartIme servIce Some would be willing to remain inserVIce, but they were not necessarily the ones the RAFwould prefer to retain. If they were accepted, theywould probably have to serve in a lower rank and losethe benefit of their temporarily acquired exaltedwartIme ranks. They would also have to be prepared toadapt to a level of peace-time pomp and disciplinewhich was likely to come rather hard after the lengthypenod when all that mattered was winning the war.

LlVlng off the fat of retained wartime personnelwould not suffice for long in any case. It would only bea matter of time before the supply of these began to dryup, and wIth newer types of aircraft coming along it

Vickers Wellington TlO RP505 'FDEE' of No 1 (Pilots)Refresher Flying Unit at FJnningley around 1949.

(Via Wing Cdr C. G. jefford)

Training School at Feltwell, which on 9 April 1947 oncemore became 0 3 Flying Training School. Its mainequipment of Harvards was augmented by a number ofTIger Moths, these latter giving way to Prenticestowards the end of the following year.

The opera ional commands underwent a similartransformation, Whilst many of Operational TrainingUmts and Conversion Uni s had disappeared by early1946, several of each remained, In particular, Trans­port Command still had a need for trained crews fortrooping purposes of various kinds, as well as airborneforces training, and therefore assorted CUs werenecessary, equipped wi h such types as Dakotas,Hahfaxes, Yorks and Liberators.

During the spring of 1947, two new series of unitsreplaced the OTUs and CUs. These were given uninumbers m a new 200-series, with numbers 201 to 224earmarked for Advanced Flying Schools, and thosefrom 226 onwards reserved for Operational Conver­sIon Umts, although there was never any likelihood hateIther. senes would be fully taken up in peacetimecondItIons, Advanced Flying Schools, which weremllIally to have been called Crew Training Units, wereformed from. the remnants of the OTU organisation.EqUipped Imllally wIth Wellingtons converted for crewtrammg, 201 AFS at Swinderby and 202 AFS atFinningley were formed out of 21 and 17 OTUsrespec ively, . though 202 soon closed down. Figh ertrammg requIrements were now to be met by 203 AFS,formed out of the Spitfire-equipped 61 OTU at Keevil,later movmg to Chivenor. Finally, 160TU became204 AFS, carrying out light bomber training onMosqUitoes a Cottesmore, then later at Driffield.

On completion of their relevant AFS course, crewswould progress to. an appropriate OCU In FighterCommand, tramee fIghter plIo s who had survived the203 AFS course would go on to 226 OCU, which hadformed as early as Augus 1946 from 1335 CU atMolesworth before moving to Bentwaters, where itspiston~engined machines gradually gave way toVampIres and then Meteors. AOP trainees were

Top:Bnstol Buckmaster Tl RP246 'FCVE' of the EmpireFlymg School at Hullavington in 1947

(Author's collection)

Centre:Gloster Javelin T3 XH443 'Z' of No 25 Squadron fromWaterbeach in 1959.

(via Ray Hanna)

Bottom:EEC Lightning T5 XS452 of No 226 Operational FlyingSchool from Coltlshall, seen at Lakenheath in 1970.

(Roger Lindsay)

4 2

449

was preferable for the long term future to look toyoung new recruits, with no war ime habits to bediscarded, and who would be experienced only inpost-war aircraft.

The rundown of training uni s started immediatelyafter VE-Day, and was accelerated when victory waslater achieved in the Far East. A typical example,consequent on the rundown of the heavy bomber forceand other reductions, was the disbandment of many ofthe dozens of Oxford-equipped Beam ApproachTraining Flights, the few remaining flights being eithertransformed or replaced within a few months by a smallnumber of Radio Aids Training Flights. By early 1947,however, these 00 had disappeared, along with theBeam Approach School at Watchfield, their functionbeing taken over by the Central Flying School, whichused Harvards for this purpose.

The Central Flying School had been resurrected atLittle Rissington in May 1946, by combining 0 7FlyingInstruc ors School (Advanced) from Upavon and No10 FIS (Elementary) from Woodley, by this time theonly survivors of their genus. Despite the theoreticalmerger, the inherited tasks were too great for oneaerodrome, and consequently the school dividedbetween the Cotswolds aerodromes, CFS (AdvancedSection) remaining with the headquarters at LittleRissington, whilst CFS (Elementary Section) used SouthCerney.

The pilot training organisation was also drasticallypruned and transformed. A few of the ElementaryFlying Training Schools were disbanded, but theremainder were retained, some in fairly skeleton form,until the peacetime reserve organisation could be setup again. Then during the spring and summer of 1947they all reverted to peacetime status, but instead ofreturning to their cumbersome pre-war titles, they nowbecame Reserve Flying Schools. They mostly re ainedtheir wartime numbers so that, for instance, 0 1Elementary Flying Training School, which before thewar had been 0 1 Elementary and Reserve FlyingTraining School, became No 1 Reserve Flying Schoolon 5 May 1947, having been civilian-run hroughout bythe de Havilland Aircraft Co, Ltd, first at Hatfield, thenfrom 1943 at nearby Panshanger. The main equipmentof these units continued for some time to be TigerMoths, augmented in 1948 by small numbers of AnsonT.ls, soon replaced by T.21s. From 1950 they graduallydiscarded their Tiger Moths for Chipmunks, or in someinstances Prentices.

With the transformation of the EFTSs, the functionof training service pupil pilots reverted to the ServiceFlying Training Schools. These too had been run downin numbers to some extent, and the wartime appellationwould no longer be appropriate, so the survivors oncemore became all-through Flying Training Schools. Likethe EFTSs, they largely retained their existingnumbers, a typical example being No 3 Service Flying

«t

; : ~: I'

ca ered for by he Austers of 227 OCU, formed from43 OTU at Andover, soon moving to Middle Wallop, 0

lay the fo ndations for the headquar ers of Armyavia ion, still based there for y years on, The hird suchunit in his command was 228 OCU, which combined 13and 54 OTUs a Leeming to provide tac ical lightbomber and night figh er training for pupils from204 AFS, initially on Mosquitoes and a few radar­equipped Wellington trainers, but soon on Brigands.

In Bomber Command, heavy bomber crews wentto 2300CU, formed from 0 1653 Heavy ConversionUnit at Lindholme, later moving to Scampton whereLincolns were received, Those destined for strategiclight bomber units found their way to 231 OCU, formedfrom 160TU at Coningsby, flying in Mosquitoes. InCoastal Command, flying boats were still considerednecessary for some years after the war, and theSunderlands of 4 OTU at Calshot now became 235 OCU, .whilst photographic reconnaissance trainees flewMosquitoes and Spi fires at Benson wi h 237 OCU,which had reviously been 80TU. The School ofGeneral Reconnaissance at Leuchars hen becamesurplus and was disbanded. Finally, in TransportCommand, 0 1382 (Transport) CU a or h Luffenhambecame 2400CU, equipped with the ubiquitousDako as, soon augmented by Devons and Valettas,Crews for the heavier ransports were catered for by241 OCU, formed from 0 1332 Heavy Transport CU aDishfor h, initially wi h Yorks and Halifaxes un il thelat er type gave way to the Has ings.

Specia ised crew raining also underwent somechanges. The wo surviving Air Gunnery Schools hadclosed down by he end of 1947, their function beingabsorbed in the Central Gunnery School at Leconfield.Several Air avigation Schools remained, equipmentbeing mainly Wellingtons and Ansons, but these weregradually rationalised and renumbered, By early 1948only three remained, of which one was based inSouthern Rhodesia using the specially designed AnsonT,20, is home equivalents having the Anson T.21. Theheadquarters unit of this part of the organisation wasthe Empire Air Navigation School at Shawbury, whichwas renamed the Central avigation School in July1949, only to become the Central aviga ion andControl School when it absorbed the School of AirTraffic Control in February 1950, equipment hen beinga motley assor men of Ansons, Welling ons, Lancastersand Lincolns.

The RAF College a Cranwell had remained inexis ence hroughou, but in April 1947 it absorbed heresiden 19 FTS to reform its flying training element,which it had lost in the lat er days of he war. In J ne1949 an RAF Flying College was formed at Manby, soonabsorbing he Empire Air Armament School there, aswell as taking over most of he aircraf and fun tions ofthe Empire Flying School at Hullavington, apart fromthe Examining Wing which had already been ransfer-

red to CFS. The Empire Radio School at Debden had asimilar transformation, becoming the Signals Divisionof he RAF Technical College in Oc ober 1949.

Thus, four years after an uneasy peace had brokenout, the basic pos -war s ructure was finally complete.This was to prove none too soon, as on 25 June 1950

orth Korean forces crossed the 38th Parallel, hearbi rary post-war latitudinal border wi h South Korea,and another major conflagra ion was under way. Forhe RAF, the period of retrenchmen and consolidationwas suddenly at an end, and rapid expansion was to bethe order of the day. ew pilots would have to bequickly trained, as would new crews for the multi-seataircraft which might be required to participate in thisnew war.

The existing intakes of pilot recruits had to sufficeat first, but these would obviously be insufficient in theevent of a prolonged and widespread war. Theexisting Flying Training Schools were operatingall-through training, by now mainly on Prentices andHarvards, though 7 FTS at Cottesmore was due to getsome Balliols. In early 1951, their ab initio elelJlent wasaugmented when 0 I Basic Flying Training Schoolwas formed a Booker, to be followed by four more ofits kind, all civilian-operated and all equipped withChipmunks. At Dalcross, 0 8 Advanced FlyingTraining School formed with Oxfords, to cater speciallyfor National Service pilots who had received theirinitial training at a BFTS, and hree similar units wereformed within the next few months.

These were supplemented by four Flying Re­fresher Schools performing he ask suggested by theirti Ie, the first being 101 FRS formed from an existingunit at Finningley and ca ering for regulars, 102 FRS at

orth Luffenham and 103 FRS at Full Sutton trainednon-regular recruits for fighters on Spitfires andVampires, whilst 104 FRS at Lichfield took in bomberpilot recruits for training on Wellingtons and Oxfords.As the requirement for FRSs diminished, so the needfor more Advanced Flying Schools increased, and bythe late summer of 1952 there were II of these inexis ence, mostly equipped wi h Meteor or Vampirejets, the exception being 201 AFS at Swinderby, nowre-equipped with Varsity crew trainers, In addition,two civilian-operated Basic Air avigation Schoolswere formed, both equipped with Anson T.2Is, andAnsons and Prentices formed the equipment of twonew Air Signallers Schools.

There had been some changes in other units. InFighter Command, the VampIre element of 226 OCUhad broken away to form 229 OCU a Chivenor, a newVampire-equipped 233 OCU was to form at Pembrey,whils 227 OCU had been res yled the AOP School andla er the Light Aircraft School. At Colerne, 238 OCUhad formed for Al radar training with Brigand T.4s. InBomber Command the original 231 OCU had disban­ded, to be replaced later by a new unit with hat title at

Bassingbourn, equipped wi h Canberra jet bombers,whils a Marham the Washington Conversion Unitprepared bomber crews for these anglicised BoeingB-29s. In Transport Command, 240 and 241 OCUscombined a Dishforth in April 1951 as 242 OCU, flyingValettas and Hastings. Coastal Command saw a needfor a new 0 I Marine Reconnaisance School, whichformed wi h Lancaster GR.3s at St Mawgan in May 1951,and at Kinloss 236 OCU discarded this type for newShackletons, later supplemented by Lockheed ep­tunes which, like the Washingtons, were providedunder a Mutual Defence Aid Pact,

In the event, no RAF squadrons served in Korea,the British air contribution being limited to Army­manned AOP squadrons and Fleet Air Arm squadronsoperating from carriers. An Armistice was signed on27 July 1953 at Panmunjom, near the 38th paralleL butby then the UK training organisation was already in thethroes of a drastic cutback to something like its formerstrength,

All the fringe organisations were dismantled, TheRhodesian Air Training Wing ceased training activitiesand soon disbanded. The FRSs and some of the AFTSshad already gone, and hey were now followed by theBA Ss and BFTSs. Even he RFSs were a first cut backdrastically in numbers, then within twelve mon hs theremainder had disappeared altogether.

The AFS organisation had also gone within twelvemonths, but not all the schools were disbanded, a newuse being found for their jet experience when severalof them were rans ormed into new Flying TrainingSchools, 2350CU became he Flying Boat TrainingSquadron for a time, but the days of he flying boatwere now numbered, and within three years this haddisbanded. A Sabre Conversion Unit had formed inApril 1953 at Wildenrath in Germany, where squadronsof the 2nd Tactical Air force were beginning to operatethis Canadian-built fighter supplied under MDAParrangements.

Times were now changing in other ways, too, andone foretaste of this was the formation at Middle Wallopin March 1954 of a Helicopter (Development) Flight,soon to join CFS at South Cerney, where it operatedDragonflies and Sycamores. Middle Wallop alsobecame the home of the Army Air Corps Centre whenit came into existence on I September 1957, replacingthe Light Aircraft School. It was initially divided in 0 anElementary Flight with Chipmunks, an IntermediateFlight and an Exercise Flight, both with Austers, and aHelicopter Flight with Skeeters.

Events now moved at a much slower pace, andrela ively few changes in the surviving RAF trainingunit structure occurred in the remainder of the fifties. ABomber Command Bombing School had formed atLindholme in October 1952 with Lincolns and Varsities.At Leconfield, the Central Gunnery School took themore appropriate ti Ie Fighter Weapons School in

January 1955, wi h Venoms and Hunters replacingsome of he earlier types. In July of ha year, 232 OCUformed at Gaydon to operate new V-bombers in heshape of Valiants and later Vic ors, and the followingyear 230 OCU reformed at Waddingtons with Vulcans.236 OCU and I MRS combined at Kinloss in October1956 to form the Marine Operational Training Unit,eqUIpped WI h Shackletons. The Air Signallers Schoolat Swanton Morley also modernised its title in April1957, to become the Air Electronics School, withAnsons and Varsities.

By the end of the decade only six Flying TrainingSchools still eXIsted, but equipment was changingrapIdly. PIston Provosts had joined the FTSs just as theKorean War was ending, to produce a Provost/Harvardtraining sequence, quickly giving way to a Provost/VampIre sequence as the Vampire T.II becameavailable. Within two years, however, the first JetProvosts were to reach these units and herald atransformation in service training which has endured tothe present day,

. Events now proceeded to unfold at a similarlyleIsurely pace hroughout the six ies, In November1961, re-equipmen within Transpor Commandbrough . a need for he formation of an ArgosyConversIOn Um at Benson, his merging eighteenmonths later into 242 OCU, which already had Beverlyson streng h, and was shortly to move sou h to ThorneyIsland. 2280CU a Leeming, which had successivelyflown Meteor nigh fighters and Javelins, as well asValettas and Canberra T.lls, disbanded in Sep ember1961, Javelin conversion then becoming the responsibi­h y of he Central Fighter Establishmen at WestRaynham, which had already absorbed he FighterWeapons School in March 1958, the establishmentmoving to Binbrook in October 1962.

A Lightning Conversion Unit formed at MiddletonSt George in June 1962, becoming a new 2260CU ayear later, and in July 1962 the RAF Flying College atManby became the College of Air Warfare: Areconstituted 2280CU took over Javelin conversiontraining at Leuchars in June 1962, only to disband at theend of the following year. The rundown of theV-bomber force, and in particular the withdrawal of theValiant due 0 fatigue problems, led to the closure of232 OCU in July 1965, its remnants forming the TankerTraining Flight, which in turn i self became 232 OCUfive years later. The next generation of aircraft beganto appear when in February 1968 a further new228 OCU formed at Coningsby with Phantoms. Thedemise of Bomber Command necessitated theindholme-based school becoming the Strike

Command Bombing School in April 1968, now withVarsities and Hastings T,5s: Yet another major advancesaw the formation at Wittering in January 1969 of theHarrier Conversion Unit, renamed 233 OCU in October1970,

• t l; ~-q..;~

In the transport field, further new equipment led tothe formation in January 1963 at Odiham of the TwinPioneer Conversion Unit, and also at that station theBelvedere Conversion Unit, attached to 72 Squadron.Nineteen months later these formed the basis of theShort Range Conversion Unit, equipped with TwinPioneers and Wessex transports, bu only the lat ertype was used after it became he HelicopterOperational Conversion Flight in July 1967. AnAndover Conversion Unit formed at Abingdon in July1966, moving at the end of the decade to ThomeyIsland where it was absorbed into 242 OCU.

The Army Air Corps Centre at Middle Wallop wasby now shifting its emphasis to helicopters, with aconsequent change in structure. By 1965 the Chipmunkelement had become the Basic Fixed Wing Flight, andwas being operated by Bristow Helicopters Ltd, whowere also responsible for the Basic Helicopter Flightequipped with civil-registered Hiller UH-12s. Therewas an Advanced Fixed Wing Flight operating AusterAPO.9s and Beavers, and an Advanced Rotary WingFlight initially using Skeeters until these could bereplaced with Siouxs and Scouts.

Meanwhile, significant changes had taken place inthe Flying Training Schools. The Jet Provost was nowthe standard trainer, but at Valley the Gnat had beenintroduced in November 1962, and 4 FTS then becamethe first advanced jet FTS, Hunters being also added tothe strength in 1967. 2 FTS had ceased to exist for ashort time, bu in January 1970 it reformed at ChurchFenton for naval ab initio flying raining, from hePrimary Flying School element of CFS, usingChipmunks until new Bulldogs arrived in 1973. Thisunit again lost its separate identity in November 1974,when it formed he R EFTS wi hin 3 FTS at Leeming.

Under a new system introduced in August 1960,pupil pilots destined for multi-engine piston aircraftundertook flying training on Varsities with 4 FTS atValley. With the advent of Gnats, this becameimpracticable, and the task was transferred in 1962 to5 FTS at Oakington. At he end of 1973 replacemen sin

Handley Page T5 of the Stnke Command BombingSchool, runmng-up the starboard inner engine atLindholme in 197l.

(Steve McAdam)

the form of Jetstreams began to appear, but a change ofpolicy led to the unit being disbanded in October 1974.The concept, however, was reintroduced in 1976, at3 FTS Leeming, being transferred m 1979 to 5 FTS atFinningley. This latter unit had reformed there in May1970 with Varsities, combining the functions of Nos 1and 2 Air Navigation Schools and later also the AirElectronics and Air Engineers School, 0 becomeresponsible for training all navigators, air engineersand air electronics operators. 7 FTS existed betweenMarch 1962 and November 1966 at Church Fenton, as aJet ProvostjVampire T.ll school, being resurrectedthere in April 1979 with later versions of the JetProvost.

Further changes had taken place at Middle Wallopby the mid-seventies. The Chipmunks soldiered on,giving basic training to both AAC and Marine pilotsbefore converting to helicopters with the BasicHelicopter Flight, now flying civil-registered Westland­Bell 47G-4s. With the emphasis on helicopters, heAdvanced Fixed Wing Flight disbanded in 1976, andaround the same time the Advanced Rotary WingSquadron, as it had now become, re-equipped withGazelles.

Ha wker Siddeley H5. l25 Dominie T 1 XS711 'L' ofNo 6Flying Training School at Finmngley.

(Paddy Porter collection)

A number of changes have taken place amongstOCUs in recent years. In July 1970, MOTU became anew Nimrod-equipped 236 OCU at St Mawgan, eventu­ally moving to Kinloss in April 1982. 241 OCU reformedat Brize Norton in July 1970, relying on operationalsquadrons for its aircraft needs, which have includedthe BAe146, Tristar, Belfas, Britannia and VC-IO.Buccaneer training is provided by 237 OCU, whichreformed in March 1971 at Honington, moving toLosslemouth tn October 1984. The Helicopter Operatio­nal Conversion Flight at Odiham added Pumas when itbecame the Air Training Squadron in May 1971, andafter yet a further metamorphosis in January 1972 tobecome a new 240 OCU, it has more recently receivedChmooks. A Jaguar Conversion Unit, set up in May1973 at Losslemouth, became a new 226 OCU inOctober 1974. With the impending withdrawal ofVulcans (and without the insight necessary to foreseetheIr vItal use shortly af erwards in the South Atlantic),

c;

230 OCU closed at Scampton in Augus 1981, and morerecently 232 OCU closed at Marham in April 1986.229 OCU had moved to Brawdy in September, tobecome the Tactical Weapons Unit flying Hunters. 1snumber was not taken up again until a new 229 OCUformed at Coningsby in May 1985 for Tornado raining.

Afur her step forward in pilot training occurred in1976 with the introduction of the Hawk at 4 FTS Valley,where it replaced he Gnat. This type also later formedthe equipmen of the 0 1 Tactical Weapons Unit atBrawdy, the reduced Hunter elemen of which became2 TWU at Lossiemouth in August 1978. 0 her recent

changes have included the move of the Cen ral FlyingSchool to Scampton in Sep ember 1984, after havingspent some time a Cranwell and then Leeming.237 OCU moved around the same ime to Lossiemouth.2320CU disbanded at Marham in April 1986, and228 OCU moved a year later to Leuchars.

Scottish Aviation Bulldog T.l XX628 '04' of theUniversity of Wales Air Squadron in 1985.

(MAP photo)

Chapter 6u[h)®[N]@~ W@y)

Supermarine Sea!ire IBs including NX809 'AC-C' of No736 Squadron of the School of Ali Combat Duties at StMeIIyn around 1943.

(RNAS Culdrose)

W ith the amalgamation of the Royal FlyingCorps and the Royal Naval Air Service onApril Fool's Day 1918, the separate naval

training organisation also became merged. Theoriginal R school at Eas church had by then beenjoined by a number of others around he country, andone in France, at Vendome. Wi h the merger, these allbecame Training Depot Stations, numbered from 201onwards to distinguish them from their RFC count­erparts which were already numbered from 1onwards.

By virtue of its different purpose, however, it wasalways necessary to maintain a naval training elementof the RAF, and more specialised types of unit weresoon set up, such as the Grand Fleet School of AerialFighting and Gunnery at East Fortune. This situationcontinued after the Armistice, with the emergence ofsuch units as the RAF Training Bases at Gosport andLeuchars for training naval airmen, the SeaplaneTraining School at Calshot and the School of Naval

• 3Jr ~-.I'•Co-operation at Lee-on-Solent. The naval element ofthe RAF became known as the Fleet Air Arm, and manyof the officers of the carrier flights and squadronscarried dual RAF and RN ranking, though most gavethe Navy their prime allegiance,

Their Lordships at the Admiralty were neverhappy with this situation, however, and fought for 20years to reverse the merger, Shortly before theoutbreak of the Second World War, they succeeded,and on 24 May 1939 the Fleet Air Arm became aseparate entity, aking with it the responsibility formuch of 1s own training, ew pilot recruits stillundertook primary and advanced flying training at RAFschools, but new units had to be formed to undertakemost other forms of naval air training and supportactivities,

It was necessary to devise some system of titlingfor these second-line units and, contrary to RAFpractice, they were given squadron status, It was notenvisaged that more than 50 such units would exist atanyone time, and therefore part of the 700-series,which was already reserved for ca apul squadrons,was earmarked for this purpose, Accordingly, on thedate of separation, squadrons numbered from 750onwards were set up at those aerodromes comingunder Admiralty control.

The RN Observers School at Ford then became750, 751 and 752 Squadrons, grouped together as 0 IObserver School equipped with Ospreys, Sharks andWalruses, whilst the School of aval Co-operation atLee-on-Solent now formed 0 2 Observer Schoolconsisting of 753 and 754 Squadrons with Seafoxes,Sharks and Walruses, 755, 756 and 757 Squadrons atWorthy Down made up 0 I Air Gunners School,training Telegraphist Air Gunners on Sharks, Ospreysand later Walruses, Another unit to be absorbed wasthe Floatplane Training Flight at Lee-on-Solent, whichformed the basis of 765 Squadron, a Seaplane Schooland Pool with Walruses, Seafoxes and Swordfishseaplanes, First-line squadrons of HMS Courageoushad for some time engaged in deck landing training,and these were now given formal second line status,becoming 767 and 769 Squadrons, shore based atDonibristle, although spending much of their timeafloat, initially in HMS Furious,

As the war progressed, many other specialisedraining units emerged, all having numbers in the 700

series, though also having descriptive titles, and oftengrouped as a school. Bases were set up near navalshore establishments in such countries as Jamaica,Canada, South Africa, India, Ceylon and Australia, Theadvent of MAC-ships and escort carriers led to adecline in catapult flights, which in turn provided theopportunity to take up the earlier numbers in the700-series, and by the end of the war the whole of hisseries had been used a one time or another fordifferent second-line units,

Vic ory in Europe and then the Far East resulted ina rapid rundown of training facilities, and a reassess­ment of needs in the light of the post-war situation, Theearlier stages of pilot training remained largely theresponsibility of the RAF, with FAA units undertakingmore specialised aspects, Most naval airmen were bythis time RNVR volunteers, and hose whom the avywished to re ain were now given the option ofpermanent service,It took some time for a real pattern to emerge, but bythe beginning of 1951 a much reduced raining strengthwas pointing the way to the future, 767 Squadron washe only one of he original uni s 0 have retained itsidentity, being now based at Yeovilton for DeckLanding Control Officer training, the term 'ClockworkMouse' (once used on the D,H,6) being applied to thecontinual circuits and landings by its Fireflies, Seafiresand Sea Furies, Also based there was 799 Squadron,giving refresher flying training on Harvards, Firefliesand Seafires, At Culdrose, the aval Air Fighter Schoolcomprised 736 and 738 Squadrons with Seafires andSea Furies and, as a sign of the times, 702 Squadronwas giving je evaluation and training on Meteor T,7sand Sea Vampire F,20s, Observer training wasndertaken with 796 Squadron at St, Merryn, on

Fireflies and ageing Barracudas, whilst 766 Squadron atLossiemouth was now an Operational Flying School,using Fireflies and Seafires, Finally, the Naval AirAnti-Submarine School at Eglinton consisted of 719 and737 Squadrons, both equipped with Fireflies, Inaddition, however, part of the task of 705 Squadron, theHelicopter Unit at Gosport, was to provide training fornaval pilots and crewmen on Dragonflies, these havingreplaced the earlier pioneering Hoverflies,

At this time events on the other side of the worldheralded a change of pace and emphasis, The KoreanWar had broken out a few months earlier, and theRoyal avy was becoming heavily involved, It was tooearly for naval jet aircraft to participate, but towardsthe end of that conflict British carriers were carryingtheir first helicopters,

Increased needs for fighter pilots led to theexpansion of the Culdrose school. A new 759 Squadrontook over most types of aircraft in use there, to leaveboth 736 and 738 Squadrons free to concentrate ontraining pilots to operate Sea Furies in Korean waters,At he end of the year, both the Yeovilton squadronsleft that station, 799 going to the re-opened wartimebase of Machrihanish, whilst 767 moved its 'mousing'activities to nearby Henstridge, At St. Merryn, theBarracuda element of 796 Squadron became 750Squadron in April 1952, the latter unit survivingcontinuously until the present day at various locations,

A naval first-line squadron firs received helicop­ters in late 1952, and a few months later 705 Squadronlost its other roles to become the Helicopter TrainingSquadron re-equipped with Hillers, Whirlwinds and a

later version of the Dragonfly, Around the same time,767 Squadron moved again, this time to Stretton, whereit later operated Avengers, Attackers and Sea Hawks,In 1953 the Operational Flying School at Lossiemouthwas split, 766 Squadron moving in October to Culdroseto concentrate on anti-submarine training with Fireflies,The fighter training element then became 764Squadron, which moved at the same time to Yeovilton,where it re-equipped a few months later with SeaHawks, and later Sea Venoms and Wyverns,

With he departure of the OFS, Lossiemouthbecame the new home for the AFS where it was soonflying Attackers, Sea Vampires, Sea Hawks and MeteorT.7s, 759 Squadron being later disbanded, St. Merrynceased to operate aircraft, and the Observer Schoolthen went to Culdrose, 750 Squadron having by nowre-equipped with Sea Princes and Firefly T,7s, OnlyEglinton maintained its status quo, though the firstGannets had arrived there by March 1955, In that year,

operational flymg training was ransformed to takeaccount of new equipment reaching the Fleet Air Arm.Both 764 and 766 Squadrons disbanded, and a new 766Squadron formed at Yeovilton in October as an AllWeather Fighter Pool equipped with Sea Venoms,

Below:Hawker Sea Fury T.20 VZ370 '20OjHF' of the InstrumentFlying Flight of No 728 Squadron at Hal Far, Maltaaround 1954,

(via Bnan Lowe)

Bottom:Percival Sea Prince T.l WP313 '568/CU' and others ofNo 750 Squadron lined up at Culdrose around 1975,

(RNAS Culdrose)

o

o[fi) @

~Du©u@lfli(RN photo)

and as a part of its duties undertook training on thistype, using four modified Harriers, designated TANs,706 Squadron disbanded back into 829 Squadron inJanuary 1981, and at the same time the headquartersrole of 702 Squadron broke away to become 815Squadron, The following year 706 moved to Culdrose,Activities in the South Atlantic led in April 1982 to thehasty upgrading of 707 Squadron to operational statusas 848 Squadron, but the task was still required, andwithin a month a new 707 Squadron had formed atYeovilton, again with Wessexes, these giving wayeighteen months later to Sea King HCAs, This remainsthe naval training situation at the time of writing,

EEC Canberra T.22 of the Fleet ReqUirement and AirDirection Unit at Yeovllton.

Aircrewman Training, At the same station, 706Squadron replaced its Wessexes with Sea Kings, whilst750 Squadron discarded its Sea Venoms,

Changes since that time have been relatively few,but with the demise of the large carriers, the emphasishas been on helicopter training, The training elementof 829 Squadron, which provided Wasp helicopters forsmall ships, became 703 Squadron early in 1972, takingover the Wasp element of 706 Squadron three yearslater to become responsible for all Wasp training, 705Squadron at Culdrose began converting entirely toGazelles in 1974, The gradual replacement of theWasps led to the formation at Yeovilton in January 1978of 702 Squadron as the Lynx headquarters and trainingsquadron,

Towards the end of 1978, 750 Squadron started tore-equip with Jetstreams, In 1980 899 Squadronreformed as the Sea Harrier Headquarters Squadron,

) r

~..•'.(i

The earliest British training aircraft to be used invery large numbers was the famous andwell-loved Avro 504. The prototype made its

first flight at Brooklands on 18 September 1913, and itsclassical and simple lines were very advanced for thattime. Shortly before the ou break of the First WorldWar it was adopted as a general purpose machine foruse by both the RFC and the R AS, Small numbers Avro 504J B3l68 of 'A' Flight of the School of Special

Flying at Cosport around 1918.(J.M Bruce/C.S. Leslie collection)

The success of the 504J led 0 i s being ordered inquan ity for the numerous training units by then inexistence at home and overseas, but his only served toexacerbate the engine supply difficulties. In any even,the Monosoupape Gnome was regarded as obsolete bythe end of 1917, and trials had already aken place atGosport with a 130 hp Clerget. Avros were thereforeasked 0 redesign he engine mounting so that a varietyof ro ary engines could be fitted. The new design hadan overhung mounting consis ing of wo bearer pIa es,and allowed he fitmen of a more streamlinedopen-fronted cowling.

In this form the machine became the 504K, and onits introduction numerous surplus 80 hp Le RhOne,100 hp Le RhOne and 130 hp Clerget engines wererecalled from RFC units for fitment in productionmachines. It was originally intended that the 504Kwould supplant the 504J on the production lines, but inpractice there were never enough engines available,and therefore many of the initial batches comprised amixture of the two versions, and sometimes also he504A, By February 1918 the 504K had been adopted asthe s andard trainer aircraft, a role it was des ined tofulfil for ten years with he Royal Air Force, whichformed shortly afterwards. Planned production of 100machines a week had almos been achieved by theime of the Armistice.

Despite having the same engine as aircraft at thefront, the 504K was sufficiently docile for it to behandled easily by novice pilots It highligh ed theshortcomings of the less able pilots, but was capable ofbeing flown a its best only by hose of outstandingability, Under the Smith-Barry system, pupils hadcontrol of the machine from the front seat, and couldkeep in touch with the instructor behind him, initiallyby waggling the control column, but later by theintroduction of a 'Gosport' speaking tube, which inappearance and use was somewhat similar to thoseused by waiters to pass on orders to the kitchen, In itsoriginal form it was essentially a long flexible metalhose, to one end of which was fitted a triangular­shaped mouthpiece, this being secured to the

Despite i s advanced design, the 504 was notessentially a military machine, and consequently had itslimitations for front-line use. The main problem wastha the observer was situa ed in the front seat, wherehe was surrounded by wings, struts and wires, makinghis task difficult, and his was compounded whenopera ional needs led to the installation of a gun, By1915, therefore, the 504 was largely relega ed 0 thetraining role, in which it was 0 prove the mainstay ofthe RFC and later RAF for nearly two decades.

Prior to the arrival of the first few trainers from theproduction line, the manufacturers provided a numberof self-contained dual control conversion units forexisting machines. Early versions of the 504 weremainly powered by the 80 hp Gnome engine, thisbeing fitted to the 504A, the first true dual controltraining version, Built in quantity by both the parentcompany and a number of contractors, this appeared in1915 and had shorter ailerons than the early 504s,broad-chord struts, and a tailskid attached to thebottom of the rudder. This version gave way in 1917 tothe 504J, fitted with the rotary 100 hp GnomeMonosoupape, though difficulties in supply of thisengine led to mixed production batches of 504As and504Js. Various modifications were made in service, andit was not uncommon to see variations to heundercarriage, fuel sys em and cowling,

The subsequent fame of the 504, however,undoubtedly s emmed from the adoption in August1917 of the 504J by Major R.R. Smith-Barry as hestandard trainer at his new School of Special Flying atGosport, With the more powerful engine he was able 0

introduce instructors to the art of recovery from thevarious manouevres likely to be encountered in aerialfighting, and they were then able to pass on hisknowledge to their own pupils.

Above:Avro 504A A5921, believed with No 55 ReserveSquadron at Yatesbury in 1917.

(J.M Bruce/C.5. Leslie collection)

were used operationatly by both services, a notablebombing raid being carried out in ovember 1914 bythree naval machines on the Zeppelin sheds atFriedrichshafen, on the shores of Lake Constance,

Specification (S04N)

One 215 hp Armstrong-Sl"ddeley Lynx We.Span 36 ft 0 in, length 28 ft 11 in, height 10 ft 5 in,wing area 320 sq ft.Empty 1,548 lb, loaded 2,240 lb.Maximum speed 100 mph at sea level, cruisingspeed 85 mph, initial climb 770 ft/min, range 255mIles, endurance 3 hrs, service ceIling 17,000 ft.

Weights:Performance:

Power plant:Dimensions:

• ; ; • '1 ) •;

instructor's head by an elasticated strap. He passed theother end back to the pupil, who plugged it into aV-shaped earpiece on his helmet. It was strictly aone-way means of communication, and much was left toguesswork or hand signals. Use of the tube was ratherhazardous in winter, as an instructor with a streamingcold could find his top lip stuck to the canvas bag.

A set routine of instruction was followed in theSmith-Barry system, comprising demonstration ofcontrols, straight and level flying, turns, misuse ofcontrols in a turn, then take-offs and landings.Manoeuvres would be analysed and commented onduring flight, and after landing there would be afurther discussion, during which the instructor wouldpoint out any bad habits which were developing. Whenthe pupil was considered sufficiently advanced hewould be sent up for his first solo flight.

The 504J was declared obsolete in September1921, but the 504K remained in service after the warwith the new Flying Training Schools, until it, too,gradually became outdated, though it was not untilSeptember 1926 that the last one left the Avroproduction line at Hamble. Meanwhile, Avros had beencontracted to fit two machines (£9265 and £9266)experimentally with a 175 hp Siddeley Lynx, and in thisSpecification, redesignated 504N, they were flown toCroydon by their test pilot, Bert Hinkler, in May 1922,for demonstrations. The modification showed promise,and was developed with a new oleo-pneumaticundercarriage in place of the original skid type.

There were no resources available at that time fora completely new design of RAF trainer, but thismodernisation of the 504 had produced an acceptablecompromise. Production orders for the 504N wereplaced early in 1927, and later that year these began toenter service with the Flying Training Schools as wellas many other units such as University Air Squadronsand reserve squadrons. Most service squadrons alsohad one or two on strength, for instrument andrefresher flying, plus communications work. In ad­dition, many of the surviving 504Ks were reconditionedfrom 1927 by the Home Aircraft Depot at Henlow and at

the same time brought up to 504N standard. Fitting amore powerful engine was not the only modificationdistinguishing the new version from the 504K, otherchanges including the fitment of large twin 18-gallonfuel tanks just outside the upper centre section struts,and additional stringers making a more roundedfuselage. The wooden fuselages and tapered aileronsof the early production machines later gave way towelded steel fuselage construction and rectangularFrise ailerons. Various versions of the engine werefitted, final production aircraft having the 215 hp LynxIVC.

An in-service modification was the fitment in 1931of blind flying equipment on several aircraft of theCentral Flying School at Wittering. This comprised aspecially designed blind flying hood over the pupil'scockpit, Reid and Sigrist turn indicators and wings with

Avro 504K rebUilds ER3546 and ER3545 of No 4 FlyingTraining School at Abu Sueir, Egypt.

(E.B. Morgan archives)

slightly less dihedral to reduce inherent stability. In theearly 1930s, crowds at the annual RAF Display atHendon were treated as a star turn to an exhibition ofso-called 'cr-azy flying' by experienced pilots flying504Ns, but by then the 1ype was nearing the end of itsuseful life. It was gradually withdrawn from 1933, to belargely superseded by the Avro Tutor, and later the deHavilland Tiger Moth.

Commander Peter Bagley has provided some vividrecollections of its flying qualities from the viewpoint ofa 'novice':

I cannot claim expertise in flying the 504 as my log bookshows only one hour in this aircraft. This was at RAF StationGosport on 25 August 1938 when I was appointed to do atorpedo dropping course - not in Avro 504Nsl

Avro 504N Kl974 belonged to the Station Flight, whoseFlight Commander was an RAF Flight Lieutenant. He briefedmyself and a Sub Lieutenant aviator as my co-pilot, andthreatened court martials if we broke the 504. His briefingseemed full of foreboding and tales of difficulties However,

he did not succeed in putting us off, so we climbed in andstarted the engine, a Lynx radial type

The 504 was originally fitted with a fully rotary Gnomeengine which required great skill in handling. In fact pilotswere first taught engine handling before any flightmanoeuvres because that type of engine had to be eithershut off completely for landings or use made of a blip switchfitted on top of the stick a solid wooden type like a walkingstick. Apparently the engine was prone to coughing and tocutting out when throttled back, and could not be restarteduntil the fuel lever had been shut and a wait of eight secondshad gone by. Meanwhile pilots had to glide, so the blipswitch was invented and pilots blipped their engine whenapproaching to land. I was grateful that KI974 had a differentengine.

Taxiing out was when one first met vice number one.The aircraft delighted in weathercocking into wind, as therudder was not very effective on the ground. Nor were thereany brakes. Because of this tendency, both lower mainplaneswere fitted with metal hoop skids to prevent the aircraftdropping one wing onto the ground and tearing the dopedfabric covering. They also prevented the aircraft fromturning right over if one wing had lifted badly during anuncontrolled ground loop - for which the aircraft was noted

We were lucky that Gosport was a grass airfield withplenty of space, as during progress to the downwind hedgewe continually went round in circles On facing into wind Iopened up the throttle fairly slowly only to find the aircraftswinging rapidly to port. Chopping the throttle and applyingslight right rudder had an immediate effect, as the aircraftdid a reverse swing to starboard. ot having lifted the tailorhaving to worry about other aircraft on the ground I just let itgo, admittedly out of control, until it stopped facing 180degrees from the original take-off direction.

On my second attempt at take-off, I opened the throttle

Avro 504N prototype conversion around 1922-23.(Official)

rapidly and before the swing to port had really commenced Ihad rudder control with the rudder quickly up in flyingposition. I cannot claim a perfect straight take-off, but we gotairborne in some 60 yards with 50 mph showing on the airspeed indicator. I held the aircraft down until we had 55 mphshowing, then started the climb out from the airfield.

The elevator was very sensitive, the ailerons theopposite, being very sloppy. Turning the aircraft resulted inbad skidding and/or a side-slip, shown by wind on the facefrom the direction of the side-slip or skid. A gyro effectgiving nose rise took place on opening the throttle togetherwith a left turn tendency. On closing the throttle the oppositeoccurred - a nose drop and turn right effect.

We climbed to 3,500 feet which took us some sixminutes. We then did turns and generally got the feel of theaircraft including one stall The nose dropped rapidly withits inherent tendency to turn to the right, but recovery wasquick by use of throttle and stick.

When I felt happy, I shouted down the Gosport tube toSpeedy Pollard, my co-pilot; had he any objection to mytrying a loop? Getting an affirmative 'None', I took a goodlook round the sky for other aircraft, then dropped the noseand slowly opened up the engine. The Avro 504 took sometime, and a loss of 750 feet before it had 115 mph showing onthe ASI, shuddering considerably as though it disliked beingdived. At that speed I started to gently pull round the loop,and much to my surprise the aircraft tightened up in alooping plane as the nose came over the horizon The airspeed had dropped alarmingly at the top of the loop to amere 55 mph. Recovery was easy and we then decided to doour first landing. Mine to fly.

As Gosport was that day on a right hand circuit Icheatedby not doing a complete circuit, but by doing a curvedapproach over Fareham Creek to land over the Northernhedge. As we crossed the hedge I found the elevator controlvery touchy and light so tried not to hold the nose too high,for had I done so and dropped the tail skid onto the groundflrst, the aircraf would have done its famous kangaroo act.This It would perform in a senes of ever ongoing bouncesbecause the elastic bunjee cord rubber suspension of theundercarriage accentuated even a small bounce Luckily wego the mam wheels 0 flrst.

I then handed over to my co-pIlot who made everymIstake I had, but as thIs fine fellow has long since left us (forthe unknown, as he failed to find his aircraft carrier in fogand WIth WIreless silence Imposed dunng the NorwegianCampaign m 1940), I must say no more He canno deny oronfirm, and I respec the memory of him. I am sure he has

told of the experience in the great hereafter about flying theAvro 504 uite an experience, I found

A ground crew viewpoint is given by CecilBristow, who had some experience with 504s at Haltonand later Manston

I had three flights in a 504N whilst in the last stages of myapprenticeship at Halton in 1932, for air experience. We alsohad a 504K in the workshops for instructional purposes. Irecall that when rigging a 504 from scratch one 'boxed' themainplanes on the floor (top and bottom planes, struts andwire bracing into a rigid construction), then attached them tothe fuselage as one unit. The fuel tanks were underneath theupper mainplanes near the root end. I los some valuablemarks m my final exams when Iomitted to enumerate that thetanks should be drained before disman ling wings from thefuselage our instructIOnal airframes never had petrol mthem, and It was an easily missed pomt l

At the end of 1933 I was loaned for a short time toManston Station Flight, which then had wo Moths, an Atlasand a 504 The flight was housed in unsuItable premises Iwas a bullding of three bays each WI h a set of folding doors,and had a one time been a otor Transport shed. There

Avro S04N K1966 oI the Cambridge University AirSquadron shown with the blind flying hood raised.

(RAF Museum)

were two lines of five brick plllars dividing the bays, andthese supported the roof I feel sure we only had part use ofthe buildmg

The 504 was always the last aIrcraft stowed away afterthe day's flymg It was an awkward Job as ItS wing span wasmuch greater han he width of the hangar doors Theprocedure was 0 push the aIrcraft nose on to the flrst pIllarWI h the allskid on a speclal barrow, then wIlh one wheelhocked the aircraf was pushed SIdeways so that the

starboard mainplane swung mto the hangar. By judicious useof the tall barrow, the wing tips were fed between the firstand second bnck pillars, some five or SIX feet, and he portwmgs were gradually brought mSlde the hangar enough 0

close the doors.AIrcraft ground handlmg was a knack not always

learned by, and I heard a tale that when the 504 was due fora major penodic inspection early in 1933, it had to be housedout of the way at the rear end of the hangar. The wizard whoachieved this juggling act was posted before the inspectionwas completed, and the story goes that it was three monthslater before it saw the light of day again l The aircraft had tobe completely turned round three times in narrow confines,working wingt~ps through the various pillars, to get it to therear. If it had been my· problem, I think I might haveremoved a set of mainplanes to save a lot of damage andime.

I recall another handhng mishap later when I was with609 Auxihary Squadron at Yeadon in 1938. Our Hinds werehen house in wo very cramped Bessoneaux canvashangars We were getting the aIrcraft out for daily flyingprogramme, when the Flight Sergeant called out to the portwmg tip man (on his blmd SIde) 'Clear, port wing?' Backarne the answer. 'Bags of room this SIde, Flig t' - and the

sImultaneous sound of gnndmg metal The said airman hadforgotten that the upper mainplane extended some feet morethan the one he was holdmg l '

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

@@ [}=\]©)I\§D ~ ~@ITlJ@

1r0@@ [J [J¥j] (Q)~ [}lJ

T he ubiquitous Tiger Moth owed its origins to thefamous de Havilland Moth, the first successfulBritish private light aircraft. It was des­

tined to remain in service for over 15 years, and toprovide initial flying experience for most wartime RAFand Commonwealth pilots, who regarded it with greataffection. Many machines are still flying in privatehands, the number, happily increasing yearly.

Specification (Tiger Moth II)One 130 hp de HavIlland Gipsy Major Ispan 29 It 4 in, length 23 It 11 in, height 8 It 9lj2 in,wing area 239 sq It.Empty 1,llSlb, loaded 1,825 lb.Maximum speed 109.5 mph at sea level, crUlsingspeed 93 mph, initial climb 673 It/min, range 302miles, endurance 3 hrs, service ceIling 13,600 It.

Commander Peter Bagley has clear recollectionsof his experiences at one of the pre-war reserveschools:

Fifty years ago I first flew solo in a Tiger oth at Prestwick,where Scottish Aviation Ltd had been assisted in setting upan ab initio fly'ng training school by the Government of theday, I had joined Course 0 2 together with 29 other pupils,some of whom had never flown at all, whilst others, likemyself, had been airborne somewhere else, In my own case

• '12ir"'-_It'-rt

(Official)

(RAF Museum Photo No P016742)

Right:De Havilland Tiger Moth J! L6923 '20' of No 1Elementary and Reserve Flying Training Schoolaround 1938.

Below:De Havilland Tiger Moth K4242, the first productionMkJ! in 1934,

Schools, and later their wartime counterparts at homeand overseas, the Elementary Flying Training Schools,Tiger Moths were also used to train instructors atFlying Instructors Schools, and after the war they alsoformed he main equipment of Reserve Flying Schools,When they were eventually replaced by Chipmunksand Prentices, hey found a ready sale for civilian use,many being refurbished and sold in the mid-fifties byRollasons, who at one s age had over 100 parked atCroydon,

standard on the production lines, Another change onthis version was the replacement of the doped fabriccover rear fuselage decking by a plywood decking,

Initial reaction to the Tiger Moth when it enteredservice in late 1931 and early 1932 was rather divided,It was not easy to fly, but this was no bad thing for atrainer, Problems of operating in a wind, the lack ofbrakes and fitment of a skid instead of a tailwheelcaused unfavourable comment, bu on the other hand itwas easy and inexpensive to operate, and it soonwormed its way into the affec ions of the instructors andtheir pupils,

One of the first modifications to be carried out wasthe trial fitment of a mass balance to the ailerons, Thishad no effect on the handling characteristics, butreduced the risk of aileron flutter in a dive, a problemwhich had led to the loss of an Avro Cadet during trials,No major alterations were subsequently made, butsome trouble was later experienced in recoveringfrom spins, especially in Tiger Moths which had beenfitted with bomb racks, Tes s were carried out atBoscombe Down, and the trouble was found to be dueto a number of reasons, including the effect of thebomb racks on the airflow over the tail surfaces, andadded weight due to accumula ed repainting and otherfactors, A cure was effected by removing the aileronmass balances, and fitting anti-spin strakes along thetop rear fuselage, extending forward from the line ofthe tailplane, this becoming a standard modification,

De Havillands were fully engaged in Mosquitoproduction by 1941, but Tiger Moths were still badlyneeded, The solution was 0 ransfer production toCowley, near Oxford, where Morris Motors soonbrought to bear theIr great experience in assembly­line production, achieving a rate of nearly 40 machinesa week at a peak, Eventual UK production of TigerMoths totalled well over 4,000, nearly 3,500 of them byMorris Motors, Small numbers were also built of aradio-controlled pilotless target version, named theQueen Bee,

In addition nearly 3,000 machines were built inAustralia, Canada and ew Zealand for use under theCommonwealth Air Training Plan, Those made inCanada required some modification 0 suit localcondi ions, These included moving the undercarriageforward, fitting brakes and a tailwheel, and replacingthe normal wooden interplane struts by steel ones, Theharsh winter climate required the fitting of a perspexcanopy and cockpit he ting, and the unreliability ofsupplies of Gipsy Majors due to shipping losses led tothe fitting of 125 hp Menasco Pirate engine, which hadalready been fitted in a trial installation, In this guisethey were known as Menasco Moths, but suffered fromhaving not only less power, but an engine which wasalso heavier.

The main users of the Tiger Moth were civilian­operated Elementary and Reserve Flying Training

·..i-.~By the late 1920s it was becoming apparent that a

replacemen would have to be found for the Avro504 , but there were several possible options,Contemporary thinking centred round a metal-framedaircraft, since the number of woodworking tradesmenin the RAF was on the decline, and it was proposed thatpower be provided by an Armstrong-SiddeleyMongoose engine, Orders were consequently placedon this basis for a number of Hawker Tomtits and alsoAvro 621s, the latter being later re-engined wi h themore powerful Arms rong-Siddeley Lynx IVC andnamed the Tutor.

Although no powered by a Mongoose, the Mothhad already been tried in RAF service with somesuccess, and therefore had to be regarded as a seriouscontender, Initially powered by a 60 hp ADC Cirrus Iengine when it first appeared in 1925, several hundredwere eventually built with later Cirrus and Cirrus­Hermes engines and also the de Havilland Gipsy, TheRAF received over 160 of hese machines, the finaldeliveries consisting of the metal-framed Gipsy­engined version, designated the DH,60M or MetalMoth,

Developed from the latter was the DH,60T or MothTrainer, of which a number were supplied to overseasair forces, The RAF showed an interest, and prototypeE-3 was test flown at the Aeroplane and ArmamentExperimental Establishment at Martlesham Heath,being followed in August 1931 by a later machine, E-5(afterwards G-AB J), Some modifications were made tothe latter, including staggering the wings to make iteasier to exit from the front cockpit with a parachute,This modification moved the C of G too far forward,which was rectified by giving the wings sweepback,The resulting report was particularly favourable asregards the ease of maintenance of the machine byservice personnel. The only significant snag was thatthe wings were still not entirely satisfactory, thewingtips being likely to come too near the groundespecially whilst landing in a cross-wind or if the tyreswere not fully inflated, However, this was soon curedby increasing dihedral on the lower mainplane,

Comparison of the results of the trials of hesethree main contenders led to orders being placed forthe Tutor and Moth Trainer. The Tomtit was dropped atthis stage, and in the event only limited orders wereplaced for the Tutor, whose makers became preoccu­pied with production of the Anson and later theManchester and Lancaster bombers, By this time the deHavilland machine had been modified to such an extentthat it was redesignated DH,82 by the makers, and theRAF gave it the name Tiger Moth, Initial deliverieswere 35 of the Mark I variant, powered by a Gipsy III,but this proved prone to overheating, especially whenclimbing with insufficient airspeed, and replacementwith the slightly more powerful Gipsy Major producedthe DH,82a or Mark II version, which was to become

• ; ;

~-.I.•1:

I was lucky because the son of some friends had a GipsyMoth and had taken me up tWIce, doi g aerobatics eachtIme.

Prestwick was then a small aIrfield, just outside the town,with one new hangar and adjoming administrative officesand class crewrooms The Course lived in the OrangefieldHotel, which abutted the Western boundary of he airfield.Disciplme was strict. We arose to do PT at 6.30 am on thearmac under an instruc or, then shaved, showered orbathed until breakfast at 7.45 am m the mess. At 8.30 webegan either lectures or took flying lessons. We workedhard until 5.00 pm, then had 0 dine-m every night, wearingstiff shirts and black ties except on Friday, Saturday andSunday.

The flying training was in Mark II TIger Moths, painted abrilliant red. This Mark superseded the first design in 1934by the late Captain (later Sir) Geoffrey de Havilland. It had aplywood fuselage instead of the earlier fabric cover. It wasfitted with a 130 hp Gipsy Major engine driving atwin-bladed propeller made from wood, but with metal-cladleading edges. The fuselage had twin cockpits, in tandemnd fitted with an instrument panel on which were mounted

an air speed indicator, a turn and slip indicator, an altimeter,an engine revolution counter and an oil pressure gauge. Thecontrol column was wood, rather like a walking stick, butfitted at its base with a metal sheath which in turn fitted into acup. The flying controls were wire operated.

In front of the control column, which was known as 'the

stick' in those far-off days, was a magnetic compass, difficultto see when the seat was raised to its top height. By anadjustment, the length of leg to the rudder bar could bealtered to suit different height pilots, and if you were tobl nd-fly with the hood over the cockpit for instrument flyingpractice you hen had to lower the seat pan to becomfortable.

The cockpits were open so we wore Sidcot suits - a onepiece overall of either rubberised cotton or Grenfell cloth.Such an overall had two large pockets in which to keep one'smaps, notebook or other material whilst flymg. A zip frontclosed he suit from the crutch up to the neck. A detachablefur collar was provided, and with the aid of flying boots andhelmet one managed to retain some warmth in the freezingweather whilst flying.

For ten hours I was instructed by my flying instructoruntil I could take-off, do all types of turns, had recoveredfrom a spin, could glide, judge distance and height and makereasonable landings. Flight Lieutenant Harry Comerford wasone of the best, and through his patience, skill and soundteaching lowe my life for an incident many years later.

De HaVIlland Tiger Moth II R4922 of No 7 ElementaryFlying Training School at Desford.

(Author's collection)

On 8 December 1936 Iwent solo, and my memory of thatevent now half a century away is as clear today as it wasthen; thIS is probably an occasion most pilots remember. TheChief Instructor, Squadron Leader Mcintyre of Everest Flightfame, told me he would give me a flying test. After both of ushad signed the flight authorisation book and the aircraftservice documents we walked out to Tiger Moth G-ADWOand inspected the aircraft - a routine always practised. Wehen donned our parachutes and climbed into our respectivecockpits, the instructor always in the front because it wasdifficult to bailout if need be, and he pupil in the rearbecause this was used for all solo flying.

He ordered me to start the engine, a procedure whichrequired ground staff to hand swing the propeller, thenwhen warmed up and run up to check for magneto drop orback firing, I taxied out. The Chief Instructor said down theGosport tubing, which was then our means of communicationin training aircraft, 'You take her off into wind please andwhen airborne I will tell you what to do'. We got airbornequite neatly for a Tiger Moth. They can hop, skip and jump ifhandled roughly during take-off. We climbed to 3,000 feet at55 mph yes, we used miles per hour on air speedindicators in those days, and if we wished could check ourair speed by a primitive spring air-operated pendulum-typeASI on the starboard wing strut.

He then got me to perform everything I had been taughtand finally said, OK take her down and do a good landing. Iwill not pretend his was perfect, but we got on he groundsomehow He then taxied the aircraft downwind to the farhedge and turned into wind. Suddenly his control column(stick) was thrown out and I knew I was 0 go solo.

The Chief Instructor did up his seat harness to stop itsnagging the sick, checked around his front cockpit andthen stood on the wing saying with a big grin, 'I want you tofly solo now. So take her off, fly twice round the airfield andthen come in and do one landing. Look out for other aircraftand Good Luck', whereupon he jumped down off the lowerwing and started walking back to the hangar with hisparachute slung over his shoulder.

[ remember thinking to myself 'you have her' and beginmy take-off run. This was nice and straight, but when I hadflying speed she seemed nose heavy so I had to apply aheavier stick force to climb out than I had ever experiencedbefore. As [ climbed ahead I thought I must m ke a turn sostarted to do so. Immediately I did this the nose went up inspite of my pressure on the stick forwards. I suddenlyrealised I had forgotten to adjust the 'cheese-cutter' trimmerat take-off and reached down with my left hand. This devicewas simply two elastic bunjees, like a catapult sling, whichwere attached to the bottom of the control column, and bytightening or loosening one or other bunjee it gave easierstick force for the prevailing flight condition. It was normal toset it half way along i s quadrant for take-off, then reset ittowards the back for landing.

The day was as cold as Scotland can be, fresh with hoarfrost on the grass and with a pale blue sky with an odd whitecumulus over the Highlands area to the North. I got sointerested in looking at the sight I almost forgot what I was todo, but self-discipline took over. Af er flying twice aroundthe circuit at ,500 feet and about 65 mph I began mydownwind procedure dropping gently down to 1,000 feet byreducing my speed and engine revolutions. At the turnacross wind I knew exactly the place to be for [ had flown

this so often duaL Finally I turned into wind and took offspeed and heigh to glide in to my landing - my firs sololanding.

Without my realising it my throttle was not completelyclosed, so the Tiger Moth began dropping her tail when afew feet up, and when she hit other Earth she just creamedon without even a bounce She eventually came to stop in anice straight line, and I turned and taxied in and closed downwhen signalled to by ground staff making a throat cuttingsign.

As Igot out of the cockpit my instructor came round thetail grinning like a Cheshire Cat. 'Well', he said, 'if you canfly a Tiger Moth like that, one day you will fly manyinteresting aircraft'. This was indeed a compliment, and Inever forgot him as a result, but I did let him down badlylater.

We were doing forced landing practice on Ayrracecourse, with snow conditions on the ground. I was coldand could not fly well that day, so my rudder control workwas ham-footed, like a man with heavy met I boots on hisfeet. Harry Comerford eventually landed and told me to getout. I thought 'He'd never make me walk back to Prestwick­or would he?' He told me to take off my flying boots, put themin the small locker behind the rear cockpit and get back in.My poor feet were nearly frozen, but I must confess the nexttwo forced landing practices were less heavy on the ruddercontroL Finally he flew the aircraft back at low height - thefirst time I had experienced low flying, and I enjoyed it somuch that I forgot my poor feet.

My instructor was an aerobatics buff, and he taught methe complete roulne which I have always enjoyed. But healso taught me a far more impor ant thing - recovery from aninverted spin. This type of spin is where the pilot is on theoutside of the spinning aircraft, because the spin startsinverted, so he is flung outwards instead of being pushedinwards as in a normal spin. It is a frig tening manoeuvre,but being taught it saved my life and got me out of a MeteorT.7 trainer which broke up over Cornwall many ye rs later. Ilive to write this half a century later, thank God and HarryComerford.

A rather different recollection comes from LesLeetham, who was sent to Sywell in 1943 for gradingand his first solo:

We trainees were also used for airfield patrol- the field wascovered with strings of old cars towed out after flyingfinished, and the station kept secure knowing that we werevigilantly guarding them with our non-firing rifles with theirfixed bayonets. Our course must have been keener orthicker because very soon there was an enquiry as to howhe Moths were being sabotaged despite hawk-eyed vigil,until a clued-up type noticed that it was only the undersidesof the top mainplanes that were being slashed by thebayonets on the rifles slung on our shoulders as we eagerlystudied these wonderful machines that we were trying tomaster.

I soloed after 11.30 hrs for 35 minutes, and will neverforget t e one thing the instruc or failed to mention andcould never demonstrate - the amazing difference inperformance without his weight aboard. It seemed like arocket, and at the required height for a turn I was about over

• ; ,

~-.l!. p @7/

the boundary mstead of well upwmd, and this threw thewhole ClrcUlt out wIth the approach Just as different WIth hehold apparently never endmg I had talked to myself all theway he patter had been dnlled in for hose hours and I wasglad when the pilot waved me on to a second attempt as hehad saId mIght be needed. ThIS did not surpnse me, but Ithought I was more prepared when I taxIed back WIth a hugegnn, only to fimsh by makmg a rather messIer secondlandmg

Squadron Leader Dick Smerdon also flew theTiger Moth:

The TIger Moth was the aircraft on which I learned to Dy, wastrained as a Flying Instructor and in which I then instructed,in all a total of 500 hours. lt is difficult not to becomenostalgic, but the Tiger had endearing qualities. Though asimple aircraft to Dy, it was not so easy to Dy well, withailerons on the lower mainplanes only. The rate of roll wasmoderate, but as I had not known the Stampe, Ignorance wasbliss absolute bliss lt was very much more comfortable toDy from the front cockpi less slipstream, better view and mthe tropIcs more shaded from the sun By the time I hadtotalled 300 hours, I could make that aIrcraft SIt up and beg. Imay be a poor self-analyser, but the TIger was such a goodramer that I had little difficulty converting to the Harvard

Squadron Leader Don Brittain writes:

De Havilland Canada DH82C Tiger Moth 4360, fittedwith DH Gipsy Major IC engine, flown by No 20Elementary Flying Training School at Oshawa, Ontarioaround 1941. ote the enclosed cockpit, metalinterplane struts and the tail wheel of the Canadianspec version.

(via Chaz Bowyer)

doing inverted aeros. (Isn't it funny the trivia you rememberafter 36 years?)

Cyril Smith was on duty one day at Thornhill inSouthern Rhodesia when a couple of Tiger Mothshappened to fly in:

At the time of departure I was instructed by the corporal incharge to see them off. 'I've never swung a Tiger Moth corp,what's the drilJ?' His reply went something like, 'The pilotswill put you right. Remember legs apart, left behind thenght, and bring the nght leg back as you swing your nghtarm down - that way you don't walk into he prop'. I wasbowled over somewhat by hIS apparent uncaring attitudeand thought that at least he would lend a hand, beingtechnically responsible for any aCCIdent that might occur. Asthmgs turned out it worked, but havmg since seen peopleWIth all sorts of problems I realise JUs how lucky I was

Ican't remember a great deal I recall It did a tlght spm - thenose seemed to stay m a small field whilst commg down. Ialso remember that no matter how tIght you did up the oldSut on Harness - holes in three straps, a pin in the other to gom the holes, and then a retaining pin It never seemed tightenough, and I always thought I was going to fall out when

Eric Sharp worked on the engine of a Tiger Moth ofCranwell HQ Flight in the early fifties:

Flymg WIth one's work was consIdered normal, especiallyfor engine fitters, and was expected If the aeroplane hadmore than one seat, to demonstrate a little faith and give

Top:De HaVilland Tiger Moth II T6026 'RUOD' of the OxfordUniversity Aii Squadron flying over Oxford in 1946from its base at Shellingford.

(I Faulconer)

Bottom:De Havilland Tiger Moth 11 BB704 'FlWO' of No 21Elementary Flying Training School at Booker in 1950.This aircraft was originally G-ADGF, but was im­pressed for the RAF on the outbreak of war.

(Author's collection)

•

Jim Henderson also recalls the Tiger Moth withaffec ion:

came a long line of two-seat aircraf for various duties,including the Osprey, Demon, Audax, Hardy and Hind,as well as single engined fighters from he same stable.These were all powered by the Rolls-Royce Kes reiengine, which proved very reliable in service.

Designed by Sydney Camm, later responsible forsuch famous aircraft as the Hurricane, Typhoon andTempest, the Har was an immediate success on itsintroduction into service. It had been designed to acompetitive 1926 specification requiring a top speed of160 mph, which at that date was quite exceptional. Tomeet this demand, he Hawker design earn workedclosely with Rolls-Royce, he original proposal being toinstall a Falcon F.I engine.

SpecificationOne 535 hp Rolls-Royce Kestrel IE.Span 37 ft 3 in. Length 29 ft 4 in, height 10 ft 5 in,Wing area 348 sq ft.Empty 3,045 lb, loaded 4,100 lb.Maximum speed 165 mph at 3,000 ft. cruising speed145 mph, initial climb 1,500 ft/min, range 430 miles,endurance 2.9 hrs, service celling 22,800 ft.

Weights:Performance

Power planeDimensions:

The Hawker Hart Trainer stemmed from a needo provide dual instruction for pilots who were

to fly the basic Hart and its manyplanned variants. The concept of such a modificationwas by no means new, as the RAF had already flowndual versions of various aircraft, mainly at FlyingTraining Schools. Some were conversions of machinesalready in service, such as the Sopwith Snipe (dual).Others were specially built on the production line, suchas the Armstrong Whitworth Siskin III (DC) and theFairey IIID (T) and IIIF (DC).

The original Hart bomber first appeared inprototype form in 1928, and was mos advanced for itstime. The straightforward design for a single-enginedbomber proved capable of adaptation, and from it

[}={] @n~~~@ [1

[}={] @ [111

U[1@O [fQ@[1

The aircraft had undergone a major overhaul and reallylooked like new. The Chief Rigger was showing me how itwas done, and it was a most interesting experience - oldAndy had helped to rig the Vimy of Alcock and Brown inNewfoundland, and really knew his stuff. We used to say thatif one gave him a ball of wool and two needles, he wouldmake you a Jair Isle H.P.42 or something!

The day for the initial air test came, and I went along asObserver, complete with clipboard and pencil It was a greatday for me, and the only snag was a slight starboard wingdown condition. On return [ asked Andy how 0 fix it as [wanted to be perfect. He told me to stick a four-inch piece ofthick string on the top of the port upper wing trailing edge.This I did and it flew beautifully. I understood the reason forthis, but asked how he knew it had to be four inches of string.His old eyes sparkled and he nodded his wise old head andsaid to me, pointing first at my head and then at my feet 'Upthere for thinking down there for dancing' ... oh GoldenDays ..

James Mc amara remembers the Tiger Moth as hisfavouri e little aeroplane, being he first biplane he wastaught to rig, at a Civil Flying Club:

and if they dropped the 5 gallon tanks which we used inthose days these would go straight through, as the wingswould not take he weight. So would a rigger if he forgot andgallantly stepped aside for someone. One also had to repairriblets quite often, as people used to squeeze and breakthem.

De HaVilland Tiger Moths of the Airwork-operated No 2Grading Unit at Kirton-in-Lindsey in 1952.

(Paddy Porter collection)

,. -.'-.......~.......... .-

It was a rigger's delight. One could rig it without troubleusing a trestle table, a straight edge, a measuring tape and alump of string. Covering it with fabric and doping over was avery sa isfying task, though one could suffer from dopegetting on one's chest.

One would run the aircraft out in the morning, and if itwould not start the first time, it was a simple matter of hittingthe impulse starter (part of the elec rics) with a brick!

The Tiger Moth was fairly fragile, and riggers wouldwear plimsolls. It was quite common for them to need minorrepairs. During refuelling, for instance, people would put afoot through the skin whilst climbmg up to the centre section,

confidence to the 'driver' I flew in everything that I had thechance to, though I never really had any ambition to beaircrew. There was an enormous satisfaction in working onaeroplanes, such as our Tiger Moth, for instance. I couldnever decide whether I wanted to run the engine from thecockpit or swing the prop for somebody else - I'd have doneboth if I could I Refuelling was an art I enjoyed, which seemsdaftl Standing on the engine cowling with a 5 gallon jerry canpouring through a chamois leather draped over a funnel,desperately trying not to spill any, for it would run straightdown the corrugations in the tank skin into the front cockpit.

I recall being told to get in a Tiger Moth on one occasionby the Air Traffic Officer, who flew often on the morningafter a heavy night - it was said 0 clear his head I Iremember quite vividly looking up at the spire of Ancasterchurch while the rest of the landscape rotated around it, allof me hanging on the Sutton harness, and trying like mad tokeep my feet on the foot ralls and not fall up and kick thestick. Inverted spins in fresh air probably did the trick forhim l

-

• t ; ;

Hawker Hart Trainer prototype K1996, originally laid down as an Audax, soon after its first flight in Apnl1932.(British Aerospace)

Hawker Hart TraIner K3l53 'R' of the RAF College,Cranwell, ShOWIng clearly the blInd flyIng hood In theraised position.

(Ken WiKey collection)

by deflecting the airflow i also had the effect ofaccen ua ing the summer overheating problem,

The test report considered the aircraft verysuitable as a training type, being easy to fly andcontrollable at very low speeds, Its flying character­istics were very similar to those of the standard Hart,and aerobatics could be performed easily and cleanly,Several modifications were recommended, however,on the production version, Brakes should be controlla­ble from both seats, the rear cockpi fit ed with aduplicate petrol gauge, the windscreen size reducedand parachute grips provided, In addition he harnessin bo h cockpits came in for cri icism, and it wasrecommended that the leg straps be anchored fur herforward, Take off and initial climb proved to be quitegood, and landing was slow and easy, There was,however some tendency to turn into wind whilsttaxiing, especially when travelling across wind,

Two further test machines were completed, K2474and K2745 having been laid down as Har bombers, andthese flew later in 1932 as Hart Trainers (Interim), Thetrials having proved the success of the concept,Specification 8/32 was issued, and initial productionorders placed, Several of the early deliveries went tothe RAF College at Cranwell, where they star ed to

rna ,hme for trials, Rather than build an en irely newmachine, they decided to take a partially completedHart variant off the production line, and consequentlythe second production Audax (KI996) was deleted fromits contract and completed in the dual control trainerconfiguration,

KI996 made its first flight on 20 April 1932, only sixweeks after receipt of he con ract, and differed littlefrom the early standard production Hart bombers, Themain variations were removal of the gunner's ring inthe rear cockpit, which was fitted with dual control, andduplication of the instruments and other equipmentexcept for the fuel gauge, which could be a problem asit was not easy to read from the back seat. Maintenancefacilities were excellent, with greatly improved accesscompared with the normal Hart, removable panelsbeing fitted at each side aft of the cockpit, as well aseach side under the ail and under the bot om of therear cockpit, A modifica ion introduced on latermachines was a long Osprey-type exhaust extendingunder the lower starboard mainplane, A tailwheel wasalso fitted to later production aircraft, in place of theoriginal tailskid,

Tests on K1996 found the controls to be effectiveand reasonably light, being somewhat lighter thanthose of the standard Hart, Both cockpits werecomfortable, though they could become stifling insummer conditions at low altitude, The rear winds­creen' came in for some criticism, being so large as tomake it impossible 0 look over or round i whichcould cause problems if it became obscured by oil, and

Production machines had a conventional cross-axleundercarriage, although a divided-axle type had beentried on he prototype, .

From the start, the aircraft had excellent flymgqualities, the controls were reported as being lightover the whole range of normal flight and veryeffective at the stall, Aerobatics presented no diffi­culties, and it would go into a spin easily, evenly andfast. In a dive it would remain steady, without anyvibration,

Har s firs entered service with 33 squadron in1930, and in the Air Exercises of that year theyoutpaced the contemporary Siskin fighters, They wereequally successful in the annual inter-squadron bom­bing competition, and no time was lost m placmgfurther orders for this outstanding and versatlleaircraft,

The advent of this fast new machine led to the needfor an appropriate training syllabus, but existingslower types of dual control trainer were inadequa efor he purpose, Official thinking was, therefore, that anew design was required, The simplest means ofproviding this would be to base it on he Hart, and inFebruary 1932 Hawkers were asked to build such a

ew construction techniques were necessary if hespecification was to be me, and consequently thefuselage was built on the Warren tubular steel girdersystem, the nose having a pleasing and. effectlvestreamlined appearance. By the time of the first flight,the more powerful Rolls-Royce F.XIB engine hadbecome available. It was lighter than the ongmalengine, being cast in a single piece, and was laterchristened he Kestrel. The engine and fuel tank werecompletely enclosed with quick-release panels, andthe honeycomb-type radiator could be retracted mflight. .

There were wo spacious and comfortable cockpitsin the rear fuselage, which was fabric-covered andfaired-in to retain the streamlining, The pilot had a.303 in Vickers Mk II gun in a trough on the port side ofhis cockpit, synchronised to fire safely throug~ thepropeller blades, whilst the observer had a movable,303 inch Lewis Mk III gun mounted on a Hawker­designed gun ring,

The unequal span single-bay wings were also ofmetal construction, he spars being 0 drawn steel stnpand the ribs of duralumin, Differential ailerons ofsimilar construction were fitted to the upper wings,

.....;-. .... Sir ~-."'.replace Atlas Trainers from June 1933, and others wentto the Central Flying School. Hart Trainers were alsoissued to No 25 and 43 Squadrons, replacingnow-unsuitable dual Siskins in these Hawker Fury­equipped units, and others went to Hart-equippedauxiliary squadrons Further large orders enabled theFlying Training Schools to replace their ageing Atlasand Bulldog Trainers, and eventually 473 machineswere built, many being sub-contracted by ArmstrongWhitworth and Vickers. In addition, a further 32conversions were made by Closters from Hartbombers

Early Hart Trainers had the 535 hp Kestrel lB, butsome were later fitted with the derated 510 hp KestrelV(DR), this latter engine being replaced by thesimilarly rated Kestrel X(DR) in the Series 2 version,which was produced from 1934. Several of the lateraircraft had tropical radiators fitted, and quite anumber of Hart Trainers served overseas, includingmany with No 4 Flying Training School at Abu Sueir inthe Egyptian Canal Zone. When first introduced intoservice, they were finished in the normal silverpaint/aluminium overall. In 1935, however, theychanged to the newall-yellow scheme adopted in thatyear for all RAF training aircraft. The Munich crisis of1938 led to the upper surfaces being camouflaged inbrown and green, this later replacing the yellowentirely.

By the outbreak of the Second World War, the HartTrainers were obsolescent, being largely replaced bythe Harvard and Master. Nevertheless, shortage ofthese types meant that many Hart Trainers continued inservice until as late as the end of 1941. Quite a numberended their days as ground instructional airframes.

Some recollections of the Hart Trainer have beenprovided by Commander Peter Bagley, who flew themat both Wittering and Upavon:My first impression of the Hart Trainer was one of beingslightly awed by its size in comparison with Tiger Moths inwhich I had flown my ab initio flying training. However, themoment I began flying in this splendid aircraft I soon forgotthis as it was easy to fly. I went solo in the type after aboutfour hours dual.

The Hart was powered by a Rolls-Royce Kestrel,12-cylinder in-line engine. It drove a two-bladed propellerthrough a reduction gearing mounted in front of the engine,which also powered the supercharger giving 6 Ib persquare inch at full throttle. This superb engine, theforerunner of the later Merlin series, was easy to handle andgave very good response even to ham-handed pilots. It wascooled by a radiator mounted below the engine, andbetween the main wheel struts. This was retractable and hadto be in the retracted position for all aerobatics. When a pilotforgot to wind it in it fell in of its own accord with a loudthump, repeating this as the aircraft resumed level flight.Instructors and flight commanders extracted reparations inthe form of pints of beer from those who perpetually forgot.

The cockpits were identical, and the pupils always flewthe aircraft from the front seat, whether solo or dual. The

\.

Hawker Hart Trainer K4752 'l', probably ofNo 2 FlylngTralnlng School at Brize Norton, seen In the snow.

(RAF Museum Photo No P005034)

instrument layout included a turn and bank indicator, airspeed indicator, engine revolution counter, radiator tem­perature gauge, oil temperature gauge, fuel gauge, plus aboost gauge. With fuel selector cock, engine priming pumpand starting switch (energising a separate starting magnetountil the engine fired) the starting drill was easy. When aKestrel engine first fired it blew smoke and flames with oilfrom each side of its twelve exhaust stubs which weremounted at the top on each side. A finely polished metalcowling enclosed the engine, and every fitter tried to makehis shinier than the others in the Flight. The throttle andmixture controls on the left side of the cockpit came to handeasily, and were tightened or slackened off by a frictionknob.

The control column (stick) was of a spade grip type. Itwas hinged for aileron control, whilst for elevator control thewhole stick moved fore and aft. Aerobatic flying was adelight in the Hart because this design of stick meant that itnever engaged either of the pilot's legs unlike those in mostother types of aircraft

Rudder movement was from an adjustable rubber bar,which could be wound in or out by a foot-operated knurledwheel. This had a distinct advantage when flying 'under thehood', a canvas device with a safety pilot in the othercockpit. The pilot's seat had to be lowered to giveheadroom when under the hood, so instead of beingcramped for legroom pilots merely pushed the rudder barfurther away by operating the adjusting wheel. Toe brakeswere fitted on the front of the rudder bar together with toestraps for foot restraint during aerobatics

Taxiing was a delight in the Hart, as with both brakesand a fully castering tail wheel, and a good view over thenose, the pilot who handled the engine properly found iteasy.

Taking off was also easy. First turning the aircraft intowind on the grass airfields of those far off days, the aircraftwas allowed to move forward to straighten the tail wheel. Acockpit drill was followed and when everything had beencorrectly set the engine was slowly opened up. The Hart atfull throttle bounced along the grass to begin with, but soongot up sufficient speed to stop this., With tail up in flyingposition, and the good view over the nose, it was easy tomaintain a straight line take-off, first by a little brake use,then by rudder. The aircraft flew off at about 65 mph, and ifheld down until the ASI recorded 80 mph the climb could becommenced. Climbing turns in the Hart were easy to control.

When the required height had been reached, the fullrepertoire of aerobatics could be flown. Loops, slow rolls,rolls off the top of a loop, spins, aileron turns in the dive, stallturns and alternater side-slips. The inverted spin and thefalling leaf were not permitted, although the former could beentered if a pilot made such a bog of a loop that the aircraft

Hawker Hart Tralner K5834 of No 7 Flylng TralnlngSchool at Peterborough.

(RAF Museum Photo No P002580)

(Via FC Lynn)

Bottom:Vickers-bUllt Hawker Hart Trainer K4900 '4' of No 4Service Flying Training School at Habbaniya, Iraq in1941. In this aircraft the student occupies the front seat.Note also that navigation lights are now fitted.

(RAF Museum Photo No P013250)

Below:Armstrong Whitworth-bUllt Ha wker Hart Trainer K6528of No 16 Elementary and Reserve FlYi~'1g TrainingSchool at Shoreham in 1938.

.)1 ).;~-.Ii.!; ;

(RAF Museum Photo No PlO306l)

literally stalled upside down and he in panic applied roughrudder. The natural flying characteristics of the Hart - goodlateral and longitudinal stability usually prevented this,however, as the aircraft recovered well if the pilottemporarily lost control for some reason, usually insufficientair speed for a particular aerobatic manoeuvre.

When writing this fifty years on I am reminded of myinstructor, a Sergeant Pilot Instructor with an 'A' class flyinginstructor category from the Central Flying School atUpavon, Wiltshire He took me up one day to do advancedforced landings, and after some near copy book runs was sopleased he said 'Alright, I've got her, and flew the Hart a fewmiles, then did another copy book 'forced' landing alongsidea pub - his favourite. Keeping the engine ticking over, thelandlord came out with two pint tankards which we bothdrank with relish in our respective cockpits, holding a handover the top of the beer to prevent the propeller slipstreamfrom spilling the beer. I was 'instructed' by this fine fellownever to breathe a word of our exploit to anyone, andthreatened with all sorts of dire and horrid things if I did so.However, I now look back on this incident with joy andamusement, and feel justified in breaking my silence.

Now let us land the Hart. Approaching on the downwindleg of No liFTS, RAF Station Wittering, Northants atregulation height of 1,000 feet, one first reduced air speed to

Facing page:Hawker Hart Trainers and Audaxes (K3l20 and K3l23)lined up at No 4 Flying Training School, Abu Sueir,Egypt in 1936.

•

T he Avro Anson, or 'Faithful Annie' as she wasaffectionately known to many thousands ofwartime and post-war aircrew, was one of

the most long-lived RAF aircraft, having served invarious forms for 32 years when it was finallywithdrawn in 1968.

Specification (Mark I)Two 350 hp Armstrong Siddeley Cheetah IXSpan 56 it 6 in, length 42 it 3 in, height 13 it lin, wingarea 410 sq it.Empty 5,5l2lb, loaded 7,955 lb.Maximum speed J73 mph at 7,000 it, CrUiSing speed140 mph, initial climb 750 it/min range 700 miles,endurance 5 hrs, service ceiling 19,500 it.

Weights:Performance:

Power plant:Dimensions:

Hawker Hart Trainer K586l '25' oi No 7Service FlyingTraiIllng School at Peterborough around 1940

(MAP photo)

1937. One story is worth recounting. A pupil on No 2 coursewas despatched in exercise No 24, height test, whichinvolved taking a Hart to about 8,000 feet carrying apassenger, in this case an apprentice armourer. The climbtook the aircraft above cloud, and on descent the pilot wasdismayed to find himself over the sea with no land in sight.For some reason he assumed he had drifted over the Westcoast, so he set an easterly course hoping to make a landfall.His confidence waned after some time and, seeing a fishingvessel below, he decided to attract the attention of the crewand get them to point their vessel in the direction of thenearest land.

To do this, he wrote messages on pieces of torn up mapswhich he attempted to drop, like leaflets, on the vessel as hemade low passes. He also threw out his gloves with the samemessage. Having failed in his aim, and by now anxious aboutfuel, he instructed his passenger that he was going to fly theaircraft at very low level and minimum speed, and when hedrew close to the vessel the passenger was to jump into thesea and make his way to the vessel and ask the crew to pointthe way to land. The manoeuvre commenced, and thepassenger climbed out onto the wing, but before receivingorders to go, he fell off into the sea. The pilot was notprepared for the sudden change in the Centre of Gravity,and the Hart nose dived into the sea. Both crew memberswere rescued to recover from their injuries, and some yearslater the aircraft was dredged up by chance in a fishingtrawl. It had crashed about 20 miles east of Aberdeen.

My service training was on No 4 course at No 8 FTSMontrose, flying Harts and Audaxes, commencing in January

80 mph. On turning crosswind at a reduced height of 750 ­800 feet the aircraft is flown into the position where it isjudged that on turning on finals the aircraft would becorrectly into the wind. A windsock always sited on the edgeof the airfield gave pilots the near true direction of the windand one read the wind strength by looking to see howstraight out or drooping the windsock was. If fully horizontalthe wind was over 30 mph.

As the aircraft passed over the downwind hedge (atWittering so often the Great North Road hedge) pilotsjudged their distance and height so that they would hope toland far enough onto the grass airfield to avoid anyturbulance at the hedge. Assuming all this had been donecorrectly and the height over the hedge was about 80 feetwith an air speed of 70 - 75 mph, the nose was liftedsufficiently to get the aircraft into the three-point attitude. Atabout 60 mph the aircraft would kiss the grass, landingperfectly on both main and tail wheels. The landing run waseasily controlled by careful use of the toe brakes and, if needbe, a small amount of throttle. Only very ham-handed pilotsground-looped Harts, and then because they had stalled theaircraft too high and dropped onto Mother Earth.

In summary it can be said without any doubt that theHawker Hart Trainer was a very fine training aircraft, and agreat tribute to Sydney Camm (later Sir Sydney), itsdesigner. I flew every variant of the Hart family - Audax,Osprey, Hind and Fury Mk I - and still think there was nonebetter than the Hart. Was it the Rolls-Royce 12-cylinderKestrel? Or was it that the variants had slightly differentflying characteristics and parameters? Whatever it was, thesmell of a Kestrel starting up will always be remembered.

Wing Commander Robert Sage flew Harts whilsttraining at Montrose:

·...t-·ait ; ; • '1 ); .The Anson owed i s origin to the Avro 652

six-passenger commercial aircraft ordered in 1934 byImperial Airways. At hat time Germany was in hethroes of re-arming, and as Britain woke up 0 the needto counter the growing threat, orders were placed formany new designs of aircraf . One pressing need wasfor a general reconnaissance land-based aircraft tocomba he an icipa ed U-boat menace, and contractswere issued to bo h Avro and de Havilland, therequirements being la er formed into Specifica ion18/35.

Each firm produced modifications of existingaircraft. The de Havilland entry was K4772, a militaryversion of their semi-obsolescent Dragon Rapidebiplane, designated D.H.89M. Avro, however, wereable to take advantage of their 652 low-wingmonoplane design to produce the 652A, serialledK4771. This made its first flight on 24 March 1935, andwas basically similar to its predecessor, but hadArmstrong Siddeley Cheetah Vis in place of CheetahVs, square windows instead of oval, and suitablemilitary equipment including an Armstrong Whitworthmanually-operated upper gun turret amidships.

Tes s at Mar lesham Hea h were followed withcomparative trials at Gosport by the Coast DefenceDevelopment Uni , the Anson being later involved in aFlee Exercise in the Nor h Sea, in which it was able todemonstrate its excellen range and endurance. The deHavilland design stood no real chance against its moreadvanced competitor, and in July 1935 the first of manyorders was placed, for 174 aircraft, to be named theAnson.

The prototype had not been withou its faults,however. When it was tested at Martlesham, criticismwas made of its stability and he rudder control, and tocounteract this it was fitted with longer tail surfaces, thefin was extended, and the horn balance was removedfrom the rudder. The Cheetah VI engines were alsoreplaced by Mk.IXs, these being mounted 3 inchesfurther forward. Following these and other modifi­cations, it was possible to fly the aircraft for lengthyperiods without attention. Difficulties with the Centre ofGravity were overcome, avoiding the need to makeconstant alterations to the trimming gear whenpassengers moved around. Quicker take-offs andslower landings were possible, and he aircraft couldnow also be side-slipped to some extent. As a result ofall the improvements, it was considered possible forhe average service pilot to fly the aircraft for lengthyperiods without undue strain, and also to carry outcloud flying satisfactorily. This was to prove invaluablefor he many roles in which i was destined to serve.

The first produc ion machine, K6152, made itsmaiden flight at Woodford on 31 December 1935, andwhen he type entered squadron service three monthslater it became the first of the new service monoplanesto have a retractable undercarriage. Its row of single

square windows had now been conver ed to acon inuous rectangular senes of windows on ei herside 0 crea e what was Virtually a glasshouse, givingoutstanding visibility to he crew. Retractable wheelswere new 0 he serVice, however, and several bellylandings led to the fitting of a warning horn 0 remindforgetful pilots that they had failed 0 lower theundercarriage before closing the hro les. Loweringthe landing gear was a tedious manual ask on theAnson, requiring 144 urns on a handwheel by thepilot's sea, a task usually delegated to the navigator orwireless operator.

Despite its advanced design, the Anson was to besupplanted in the coastal role by Lockheed Hudsons,which had more powerful engines and a greater range.By the time these began to arrive from America,however, shortly before the outbreak of war, theAnson was already serving in what was to be its majorrole. The possibility of a trainer version had beenmooted as early as 1935, and large orders were placedin 1939 for this purpose. In the meantime, though, quitea number of the early reconnaissance Ansons had beendiverted to training units, pending the arrival of theAirspeed Oxford, which had been specifically desig­ned as a trainer but was not yet available. FlyingTraining Schools started receiving Ansons for pilotraining at the end of 1936, and many morereconnaissance Ansons were la er to become trainersin a varie y of roles.

The true trainer variant, unlike its predecessorwas fitted with wing flaps and also had modifications tothe windscreen. I could be adapted for all types ofcrew training, and by the outbreak of war was beingused at both service and reserve schools forinstructing fledgling navigators, air gunners andwireless operators. Those used for gunnery trainingwere equipped with a Bristol hydraulically operatedupper turret, fairly similar in design to that of theBlenheim.

With the introduction of the British CommonwealthAir Training Plan at the end of 1939, further largeorders were- placed for machines to be shipped toCanada, Australia, ew Zealand, South Africa andSouthern Rhodesia. Large numbers were also built inCanada, where the RCAF used different versions of themachine. Canadian-buil aircraft fitted with Jacobsengines were designated MkIl, whilst MksIII and IVwere British-built machines fitted respectively withJacobs and Wright Whirlwind engines. Later came theCanadian-built MksV and VI, respectively for navi­gation and gunnery training, both fitted with Pratt andWhitney Wasp Juniors.

One major difficulty with Commonwealth trainingwas that aircrew became accustomed to the clear skiesprevalent for much of the year in several of thecountries concerned, and had subsequent difficultyadjus ing to the British climate, with mountains and high

ground of en obscured by bad weather. To reduce heconsequent high casualty rate several AdvancedFlying Uni s were se up around the country, those for

Above:Avro Anson JK88l9 '52' of the School of Air Navigationat St Athan around 1939-40.

(Author's collection)

Observers all being equipped with Ansons the type ofaircraft to which they had already become accustomedwhile raining.

Below:Avro Anson J K8727 'H7' of No 1a Service FlyingTraining School at Ternhill in the autumn of 1940.

(via Eric Taylor)

942, one Flight Sergeant a an Air Observer School relievedthe tedium of rou ine cross countries by teaching one of henavigator instructors to fly an Anson, mcluding take-offs andlandings.

I do not recall any units which used Anson for pilottraining, although I believe there were some. No I Staff PilotsTraining Unit at Cark was one at which I was based as aninstructor, but that was a sort of OTU for Flying TrainingCommand. A umber of pilots were sent to Air ObserverSchools in 1941/42 after get ing theIr wmgs, primarily toallow them to gain more experience while being usefullyemployed It was these chaps who were so vulnerable 0 thedOClli y of the Anson for, with perhaps 500 hours m their logbooks, they felt they were pretty clued up. However, thosewho dldn' die or suffer injury rapidly learned that the Anniewas the exception and it was necessary to learn again to flywith due care and attention.

The Anson Mk I flew as if on rails. One could carry out afighter type approach and landing, a power-off steep glidingturn to level out at fifty feet just short of touch down, withoutany qualms It was a surprise, late in the war, to come to theMk XII and, in the reactIvated RAFVR, the T.21 with fullhydraulics and constant speed airscrews which demandedthe respect extended to real twin-engined aircraft. Perhapsthis was the hidden danger in the Anson Ias a pilot tramer. Itengendered a false sense of competence and ability in thosewho came to fly it for any length of time before being

~-.It'. • ~W1~(I) IA\ ~(o'l!F

SWitched to he heavier and more demandmg aeroplanescloser to squadron service. The number of pilots postedfrom Anson units WIthin Flying Trammg Command who werelater to come to gnef on higher performance aircraftappeared significant It was too late to realise then howforgiving of casu I handling the good old Annie had been.

There was one party trick probably unique to the Anson.Flying out of Prestwick in the winter of 1940/41, one met agood number of prodigious north-westerly gales. It waspossible to climb to two or three thousand feet, to head mtowmd before manually lowenng the undercarnage, throt Ieback, pump down the flaps then reduce airspeed untll, at alittle over fifty knots, the Anme would be partly hangmg onits props. MystIfied pupil navigators, lying prone on theirbellies over the ombsight, would see the target driftingforward down the sighting wires, to disappear beyond thenose as the Anson moved steadly backward relative to theground. Good old Annie, hard worked, much abused, butperhaps virtually indispensible.

Avro Anson 1 N5331 of No 10 Radio School at CarewCheriton around 1943-44. This example appears to bea conversion from the flap1ess reconnaissance version.It is fitted with the Armstrong Whitworth AW38 tUJIet.

(Author's collection)

Avro Anson I W253I of No 8 Service Flying TrainingSchool at Moncton, New Brunswick in September 1941,wearing high-visibility markings.

(via Doug McPhail1)

The Anson was used widely by training units inboth Bomber and Coastal Commands. A speciallyequipped version was also used by 0 62 OperationalTraining Units to train radar operators in airborneinterception, these being distinguished by anarrowhead-shaped aerial on the nose and a pair ofvertical aerials on each wing leading edge.

Anson development continued with transport andcommunications variants, but it was not until after thewar that hree further modernised trainer versionswere produced. All had metal wings and ailplanes,and were fitted with Cheetah XVs. The T.20 was builtfor se as a naviga ion trainer by he schools being setup in Southern Rhodesia, and was fi ed with aransparen nose for bomb-aiming. When tested,however, it met with some criticism, as insufficientspace and an inconvenient layout had been providedfor trainee navigators, particularly where astro navi­gation was concerned, and in fact the aircraft wasconsidered unsuitable as an astro or drift platform. Itsequivalent for home use was he T.21, which wasordered in some quan i y, whilst a few T.22s were builtas radio trainers for air signallers. In all, over 9,000Ansons were built by the parent company, in addi ionto nearly 3,000 constructed in Canada. The last trainer

was delivered in 1952. Many surplus machines werecivilianised and flown on charter work in the earlypost-war years.

Many aircrew have vivid memories of the Anson.Squadron Leader Dick Smerdon recalls:

The Anson was an extremely stable slow flying machine Irecall approaches at 40 mph Its claim to fame was its beinghe first RAF type WIth retractable undercarriage I wellrecall my first solo, all the 144 winds necessary to raise theundercarriage after take-off, and the necessary windingdown again when flying downwind before landing. It wouldalso carry a great number of persons and must have had awide Centre of Gravity envelope, although expecting it totake off with a cricket team in Rhodesia, ground level 5,000feet, was pr ably a bit too much' However, taking six toCyprus from the Canal Zone was no problem.

Rupert Cooling flew quite a number of Ansons

The sobriquet 'Old Annie' epitomised the motherly, nannieimage attached to the Anson It seemed so safe, so secure,viceless, forgiving. Paradoxically, this made it by extension adangerous aircraft, as it was tediously boring. People did killthemselves in Ansons, usually by trying to fly under hightension cables, contour chasing round woods and copses,steep turns round chimney stacks of stately homes orshowing off to the latest girl friend Also, of course, by hittinghill tops hidden in cloud, but even then, the Anson couldforgive There are recorded cases of Ansons literallygrinding to a halt while crUlsmg in cloud, allowmg its crew tostep out, shaken but substantially unmjured, on to someupward sloping ground miles from theIr intended track. In

• 51: ~-.I.'• .""',;

Ralph Dargue, who served wIth training units inCanada, recalls one flight in an Anson, which left himwith a vivid recollection of it being cold, draughty,noisy and enlivened only by the sight of an erk windingup the undercarriage and then minutes later, anotherpoor devil wearing himself out winding it down l Ralphwas well in the back row, but heard all about thatexperience.

Another ex Wireless Operator/Air Gunner was IanMcCubbrey who flew in Ansons during the war at bothDumfries and Wigtown, and then post-war with 0 IIReserve Flying School at Scone:

My main recollection m these aircraft was of the poortrainee's job to wind up the undercarriage 140-odd turnsup on take-off, then another 140-odd down on landing. lt wasa good thing we were fit and able in our early daysl TheMark Is were passable to fly in, but one did need Sidcot suitand furlined boots for comfort Once aIrborne, I was mainlypreoccupIed with the operatlOn of the complicated 1083Receiver/TransmIlter With Its odd colis kept in the boxesbeside it

In 1949 I jomed the RAFVR, and we dId our flying mAnson T21s and thoroughly enjoyed It as our seat was upforward beSIde the Airwork pilot. WIth a perfect frontal viewof everythmg ThIS verSlOn had a hydraulic undercarriage,so we led a very comfortable existence I The WIT key was onthe starboard window sill, and the receiver/transmitterbehind the pilot

Life was quite pleasant with two-week annual camps,visits to Jersey and back and also to other RAF stations Oneincident I recall was on a flight to Gare Loch in April 1950.The pIlot. Bill Hamilton, noticed a laid-up carrier there andsaId he would like to see If our Anson could make a landmgon its deck l He then lowered hiS undercarnage and made anapproach towards it in the normal manner We saw navalboats shootmg towards It, and red flares bemg fired off. thenjust as we neared the ShIp he revved up, did an overshootand headed back to Scone.

Bill Williams spent a short time training as aWireless Operator on Ansons at Dumfries during thesummer of 1944:

During this lIme we earned out six day cross-countryexercises and one night flIght The total day hours was 20and the mght 3 hours 10 minutes I will never forget the nightexefClse, thIS being my very first taste of night flying Weflew over 10/10 cloud, With a full moon above, making it alllook like cotton wool below. A magnificent sight andalthough I flew at night regularly afterwards, 1cannot recallanything to touch that

The Staff Pilots at 10 (O)AFU consisted of names likeKarpinski, Cylwik and Rychlik, recorded in my Log Book.

There was one mid-air collision between two Ansonswhen we were there. One of the victims was a Scotsman, SgtRhodle, who was on our course at 0 4 Radio School atMadley a grand lad I know for a fact that at least four of thehundred on this course were kllled before they got to anoperatlOnal squadron.

I also remember an occasion when the Anson I was

flymg m over the Irish Sea in thick fog only just avoidedcollidmg with another Anson. The pilot decided that his wastoo dicey and returned to basel

One of the exercises was routed over my homelandthe Isle of Anglesey (now renamed Gwynedd). Theinstructor, a Warrant Officer, kindly took over theTR.1154/l155 radio and allowed me to view the island fromabove for the first time he also gave me 98 per cent for theexefClsel I was later able to fly over my home at about ahundred feet in a Lancaster

Bill Bateman trained as a National Servicenaviga or on Ansons at No 3 A S Bishops Cour,

orthern Ireland in 1953, and later at C CS Shawbury:

The Anson T.21s at 3 ANS were used for initial trainingexercises of about 21/2 hours duration. They were a bitvulnerable to turbulence, and at times gave their crews arough ride. There was no staff navigator aboard, so it was upto the pilot to monitor the work of the student navigators andfind the way home when they got lost

On completion of traimng I was posted to the Centralavigallon and Control School at Shawbury This was home

to a swarm of Ansons and a squadron of Lincolns. TheLincolns were used as long range navigation trainers and theAnsons as guinea pigs for stude t air traffic controllers. Mostof the officers on the Anson squadron were recalledreservists who had served during the war. They referred tothemselves as the 'retreads', and a scruffy lot they were, stillusing their wartime uniforms as they flatly refused to buyanything new just for their eighteen months stint. The rest ofthe aircrew, apart from a couple of ational Servicenavigators, consisted of what to us were hoary old COaircrew, signallers, gunners and the like. They were allgreat characters, and looked after us sprogs like Dutchuncles The Flight Commander had flown various types ofaircraft, and had spent some time as a prisoner-of-war,having been shot down in his Spitfire during an intrudersweep over France.

The long suffering aircraft and crews spent hours doingcircuits and landings with the occasional emergency (real orsimulated) thrown in to break the monotony A rather morehairy variation on this was to act as guinea-pig for the studentGround Controlled Approach (GCA) operators, who had acaravan at Sleap, an otherwise deserted airfield some eightmiles from Shawbury. This involved the pilot, flying oninstruments, doing exactly as he was told, to see where hewould finish Upl Another crew member sIttmg beSIde him mthe Wireless operator's seat kept a lookout for other aircraftin the circuit doing the same thing, and monitored theaircraft's descent The pilots were usually keen to co-operatewith the students and would do a full approach, onlybreaking away at the last moment

To save wear and tear on the hard-worked aircraft, theundercarriage was not raised or lowered on every circuitThis would have meant as much wear in one day as mostaircraft would suffer in a month, so the undercarriageremained retracted. On two occasions the lookout's warningcame too late to prevent the aircraft setting up the unofficiallow-flying record. Two aircraft both managed 0 removefour inches from the blades of their propellers by touchingthe concrete runway with them. Fortunately he blades were

made of lammated wood, and the tips simply splintered sothe aircraft were still able to climb away safely. Had theblades been made of meta!, they would have bent. renderingthem useless, and the aircraft would have flopped down andslid ignominously to a halt with disastrous consequences.

The Anson were also used from time to time forcommunications flights and aerial searches. One day 1undertook a trip to Chivenor which at that time was a FighterCommand OCU, using Vampires. The route had beenplanned to avoid an air-to-air firing range over the BristolChannel, and on the return journey we were happilythinking that we were well clear of any excitement whensuddenly from nowhere a bright yellow Tempest shot acrossin front of us at the same height and abou 200 yards away,closely followed by a fluorescent green drogue, in turnclosely followed by a Vampire banging away with redtracer. I have never known an Anson descend so fast, itdropped like a brick, the Polish pilot meantime cursingvolubly in his native tongue. We crossed the Severnsomewhere near Chepstow at a height of ten feet above thewater, or so it seemed.

There was a bIg influx of Ansons into Shawbury duringmy stay, and for a while all the pilots were kept busy airtestmg the new arnvals. Some of the earlier marks, includingsome with wooden wings. soon disappeared, probably forscrap.

We had two mishaps during my sojourn on thesquadron. W-Willie was reckoned to be our best aircraft,being 10 knots faster than any of the others, but one day Itsuffered an undercarriage malfunction. lt would not lockdown and couldn't be retracted again, so the aircraft was putdown on the grass after a fast flat approach with flaps raisedto minimise damage. lt gently descended onto its belly andslithered through the boundary hedge, across the Shawbury­Grinshill road, coming to rest in a field The crew lost notime getting out of it and retreatmg to a safe distance, andwere still out of breath when the Flight Commander, whohad followed the fire tender and ambulance to the scene,asked them to 'Go back and do it again, more slowly, as Imissed it l '

On another occasion, Y-Yoke was taking part in an aerialsearch in South Wales, based on Pembrey, FighterCommand OCU. When it arrived at Pembrey fromShawbury, Air Traffic Control informed the pilot of therunway in use and the surface wind. He realised that thecrosswind was beyond the limitations of the aircraft, and toldATC so The con roller, presumably a fighter type,remarked condescendingly, 'What's the matter. Can't you flythat thing?' This was like a red rag to a bull, and themevitable happened. The aircraf side-swiped its undercar­nage from its fixings and slid on its belly, gently turning endfor end as it want The airmen down the back, who had beenbrought along as lookouts, sat open-mouthed at the sight ofthe navigator running back along the fuselage, kicking thedoor off its hinges and disappearing, closely followed by thepilot yelling at them to get out He said afterwards that itlooked as though they thought aeroplanes always landed thatwayl I believe both aircraft were subsequently repaired andsaw further service, but I had left Shawbury by then andreturned to humdrum civilian life.

On this same search, Iwas in another aircraft, which wasbeing flown by the Flight Commander. We did he morningstin and Y-Yoke was to do the afternoon shift There was

quite a wind that day, and considerable turbulence roundthe Welsh mountains. We were only some 800-1,000 feetabove the ground in order to get a close look at anythinginteresting. This was not re lly a good idea, as we foundourselves at one point descending rapidly even though theaircraft was in the climbing attitude, with full power on bothengines. We had descended to some 200 feet and werelooking for a reasonably flat area to drop into when wesuddenly flew out of the downdraught and were able 0

climb away. We were both sweating a bit by then, though I

We had three Mkl2s, in addition to the T.21s, thesebeing used, amongst other things, for continuation raining,and for the QFI to check out pilots. They were well SUited forthis, being fitted with dual controls, but they were somethingof a fire hazard. The manual priming pump used i thestart-up procedure was mounted on the dashboard in front ofthe right-hand seat lt fell to me to work it. and these pumpsalways leaked, dripping 87 octane onto the legs of whoeveroccupied the seat I still have my flying suit be ring thestains! If anything had gone wrong I would have made quitea blaze in my own right!

Wing Commander Rober Sage flew Ansons manytimes throughout his long career:

My first flight in an Anson was in December 1937 (K6301) andmy last flight in April 1959. In the meantime I flew them inseveral different roles and theatres. During the late 1930sAnsons were being used for crew training in bombersquadrons which were being equipped with such things asWellesleys and Hampdens, which could not be fitted withdual controls. I became a specialis in instrument flying(blind flying in those days) and beam approach techniques,and found myself on the strength of the Beam ApproachTraining and Development Unit at A&AEE Boscombe Down,equipped with Ansons. We reached a stage of proficiencyenabling us to continue flying with a vercal visibility of just50 feet For that reason I suppose, in hindsight, one mightquestion the value of that sort of training, because nothinglike that proficiency was achieved with front-line aircraft.

I preferred the Anson to the Oxford, which I did not flyuntil 1947, though one had to concede the greater advantageof the hydraulic and electrical systems of the latter aircraftThere certainly were problems with the Standard BeamApproach equipment on the Ansons, with no generator tocharge the battery, and receivers which were very sensitiveto voltage changes. In winter this was aggravated by iceforma ion on the dipole and vertical aerials. The phySicaleffort required for undercarriage operation and enginestarting was of course legendary on the Anson.

Only twice during my many hours of Anson flying did Iexperience sudden failure of the Cheetah. Once was whenan engine shed the valve gear from one cylinder, takingmost of the cowling, fortunately near enough to a landingground to be able to make gracefully the inevitablesingle-engined landing. When engines fell apart. of course,you could see it all happening. The second occasion was ontake-off from the landing ground at Ventnor with a full load ofpassengers, when the starboard engine died completelywith some sort of carburettor failure just at the point ofunstick. I was able to re-land and was for unate to over-run

51; ~-.Ii. • m).;

away about one hour, and these had a bomb rack fittedunder the fuselage for 25lb practice bombs, We had toremove the pins from the bombs after the pilot had done hisengine and ground checks, and hand them all to the traineenavigator who was going to drop the bombs,

The Ansons were well liked by the ground crews, 1loved the years I was associated with them, The handcranking of the engines to start could be hard worksometimes, though on the whole I think the Cheetah enginewas good and reliable, One trouble we did have wascylinder retaining bolts breaking, causing engine failure, butas far as I can recollect we never had any losses caused bythis,

One ground crew complaint was when you went up onair test and you had to wind up the undercarriage, thehandle for this was behind the pilot's seat and it took nearly150 turns to retract the wheels Another poor thing was thefuel change-over cocks, which were low down on thestarboard side of the cockpit. There was about 18 inches ofmovement on change-over and you had to be very careful asyou could easily cut your hand,

I think we were lucky while I was at Bobbington as Irecall very few accidents, despite the many flying hours putin, One I do remember was an Anson on take-off run downthe runway when the starboard engine cut. Before the pilotcould take action the plane veered off the runway and thestarboard wing took the rudders off about five aircraft, butluckily no one was injured,

In the summer of 1943 I was posted to No 1Air GunnerySchool at Pembrey, At this time Blenheims were beingphased out and Ansons brought in to replace them, We hadto check the Ansons when they came in, and before theywere allocated to flights, The flying pattern was much

different at AGS as it was only done in daylight and they onlyflew out over the Bristol Channel doing air-to-air firing atdrogues towed by Martinets, It was at Pembrey that I firstworked with WAAF airframe and engine mechanics, and Ithink it showed how easy the Ansons were to maintain whenwe found it easy to teach WAAFs how to do Daily Inspectionbetween flight inspection and refuelling, and they seem tohave no trouble doing the work themselves afterwards,

The Anson could always carry a good weight of freight ifneed be, At Pembrey, soon after receiving Ansons,equipment was needed for use in servicing, One day the oldAnson we used on Station Flight, with the pilot, navigator andmyself, flew to Carew Cheriton to pick up some trestles andlifting jacks, We loaded up as much as we thought the planecould safely take, and then had to get to the end of therunway, hold her on the brakes and give the engines fullpower. We waited until the tail was trying to lift and then letoff the brakes, As we lumbered down the runway our heartswere in our mouths, but the pilot just managed to clear theboundary hedges, There were no further problems, and welanded normally at Pembrey,

Another trip we had was when the CO from Pembrey, aGroup Captain, was posted to Morpeth, We had to take himand all his kit, and he informed us that he would be doing thenavigating, However, on our way over the Welsh mountainswe ran into a thunderstorm, and as the Anson couldn't climbvery high we were unable to get above it. We could not try

Avro Anson T20 VS504 before being flown to SouthernRhodesia in 1948 for use by No 3 Air Navigation Schoolat Thornhill.

(British Aerospace)

II

Avro Anson T2l VV253 'RCT-l' of No 18 ReserveFlying School at Fair Oaks in 1950.

(MAP photo)

to get below the storm because of the mountains, and being arather elderly machine it had no wireless equipment onboard, so we had no means of communication, However,after flying for ages, the CO admitted he was lost anyway,and we eventually came out into clear weather, when wewere able to identify landmarks, We were evidently nowflying over Lancashire, as I recognised the area where myparents lived, and that made me sweat as I knew that manybarrage balloons were protecting the various industriesthere, Our luck was in, though, as they were all on theground at that time, and the rest of the journey was made inclear sunny skies,

I was posted to the 2nd Tactical Air Force in January1944, so I left the Ansons behind, and it was not untilNovember 1945 that I was reunited with them at No 84 GroupCommunications Squadron at Celie, Germany, These Ansonswere much more modern, not as basic and bone shaking asthe ones in Flying Training Command, being much warmerto fly in and having hydraulic undercarts, Working on thesewas much easier, things were not being rushed, though onething that was hard was that all the petrol bowsers had to berefuelled from four gallon jerry cans,

Cyril Smith serviced Ansons soon after the war atThornhill in Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe):

Alot of the flying was carried out in fair weather, so life wenton at a relaxed and most enjoyable pace, Normal workinghours were 0600 - 1300 to avoid the heat of the afternoonsun, but with an increase in aircraft numbers the rules were

changed to embrace afternoon and night flying, Ansonswere the easiest aircraft in the world to keep flying, noserious problems ever being encountered In fact we hadmore problems with the pilots, Certain characters wererather notorious at disobeying signals, and some of theluckless marshallers matured earlier than one would havewished, One visiting SRAF Anson pilot, independent of anyground crew signals, started up as an erk ducked under thewing, foolishly within the propellor are, to advlse theoccupant that his door was still open and a trolley-ace wascoming, He got away with it, but quite a heart-stoppinglesson was learnt by everyone present that day,

One day I overheard a pilot tearing a strip off his twotrainee navigators for getting hopelessly lost and not askinghim where they were l I often pondered after this exchangewhether the navigators were ever responsible for gettingthe aircraft back home,

It was a great relief to change over from Mkls to theMk20s which did not need winding up, This involved gettingtucked in between nacelle and fuselage, being blownbackwards by the propellor Just inches away, then duckingunder the wing and repeating the performance on the otherengine,

A recurring problem with the starboard engine onVM414 had resulted in several early returns, After furtherservicing I went along for the ride with one of ourcommissioned pilots on the called-for Air Test. Onceairborne, amongst other checks was MAGDROP, first one offthen the other and for 'complete satisfaction', as the man inthe driving seat put it, both off together. There was analmighty bang, the aircraft lurched as power was restoredbehind a windmilling prop and he got away with it. Thesequel to all this was the engine having to be completelystripped and broken valve parts replaced I

On the occasion of Navigators qualifying, it was thecustom for the passing-out ceremony to be accompanied by

• t; ,

~-.It'•being intended for navigation and radio training, hadthe turret omitted, but there were no other significantdifferences and very little change in the handlingqualities, Both versions were built in large numbers,total production exceeding 8,500, Many were flown inAustralia, Canada, ew Zealand, South Africa andSouthern Rhodesia, In practise, the crew training rolelargely fell to the Anson, and the Oxfords were mostlyused for pilot training, the turrets being removed fromMkls, Many of the Oxfords used in Canada andRhodesia had Pratt and Whitney Wasp Junior engines,and in this specification were designated MarkV,Neither the MkIII nor the MklV versions had gone intoproduction, these being fitted respectively withCheetah XVs and experimental Gipsy Queen IVs,

Much of the production was sub-contracted toPercival and Standard, and a test report in April 1941commented that one of the latter (V3868) comparedfavourably in performance and general handlingqualities with those built by the parent firm, Much thesame comment was made in October 1942 on the firstproduction MkV (EB424), whose engines, cowling,exhaust ring and muff had been adapted from theequipment of the Vultee BT-I3.

Colloquially known as the 'Ox-box', the Oxfordentered service in late 1937, and was soon in use by theCentral Flying School and the expanding number ofFlying Training Schools, It continued to servethroughout the war, mostly with Service FlyingTraining Schools or their successors, the (Pilot)Advanced Flying Units,

Both aerobatics and spinning were prohibited,being a twin-engined machine, though it was notunknown for an Oxford to be rolled or looped,Recovery from an unintended spin was deemed notdifficult, however, normal procedures in such asituation being effective, the inner motor being openedup to help rudder action, On occasion, however, anOxford would spin unaccountably, and be difficult orimpossible to recover, and consequently FlyingTraining Schools banned this manoeuvre, Investigationeventually found the aircraft susceptible to misalign­ment between the wing root fillets and the enginecowlings, Fitting a leather seal improved matterssomewhat, but a hoped-for cure to the problem byfitting twin fins and rudders on N6327 provedunsuccessful.

The Oxford was much more demanding of the pilotthan the Anson, and consequently those that survivedtheir training course attained flying skills of a relativelyhigh standard, On take-off extreme care was necessarywith the throttles and controls, if the aircraft was not toswing smartly to starboard, resulting in either anS-shaped take-off or a ground loop, Single-enginedflying could be tiring as the rudder proved inadequatein this situation despite its size, The good field of viewwas an asset in landing, which was not usually difficult,

Airspeed Oxford Is of No 14 Service Flying TrainingSchool at Cranfield in 1940. These are fitted with theArmstrong Whitworth gun turret.

(Author's collection)

except for attempts at three-pointers in cross-winds,when the rudder became blanketed, causing theaircraft to wander off-course,

In Canada, the Oxford was very prone to moistureproblems, Having wooden wings, the damp climateaffected the glue in the joints, which gradually filled upthe drain holes, Consequently when the aircraft went infor repair or inspection, several gallons of water wouldpour out. It was not uncommon for dry-rot to develop inthese conditions,

The wooden construction also gave trouble in thetropics, In humid conditions, the casein-based adhesiveused in construction developed a fungoid growth,particularly in the joints, Experimentation led toproduction of a resin-based adhesive, and this wasused for later production aircraft, entirely curing theproblem.

As with the Anson, aircrew experienced difficultyadjusting to the normal British weather after learning tofly in clear overseas skies, and a number of (Pilot)Advanced Flying Units were set up, mainly equippedwith Oxfords, to overcome this problem, In addition,several dozen Oxford-equipped Beam ApproachTraining Flights were set up, their aircraft beingdistinguished by large yellow triangles painted on thefuselage sides and under the wings, Attached to bothAdvanced Flying Units and Heavy Conversion Units,these units provided tuition in the Standard BeamApproach system for bringing in operational aircraftsafely in conditions of poor visibility,

Production ended in July 1945, and the Oxford waslargely superseded after the war, though a numberwere retained, mainly for communications duties, orattached to Fighter Command to help single-enginepilots to adjust to the Hornet and Meteor. They werealso issued to re-formed" reserve squadrons, some ofwhich were equipped with Mosquitoes, being used forconversion and instrument training, When the Koreanwar and other factors led later to an expansion in flyingtraining, many surviving Oxfords were brought outof storage and issued to Advanced Flying TrainingSchools, where they were used to train ationalService pilots until the last of these closed in 1954, Anumber were also sold for civil use, some after beingreworked as small airliners by Airspeed, in which

AJispeed Oxford I ED268 '12' of the Air TransportAUXiliary Training Unit at White Waltham in 1944,

(Author's collection)

.·'!IIt-.~ • ; ,

~-.I'. • ilft ;? oj

guise hey were rechristened ConsulsSquadron Leader Dick Smerdon recalls:

The Oxford was dlstmctly Bntish and provIded the pilot witha good twm-engmed tramer pnor to hIS conversio tooperational types I mtroduced hIm to operatmg the(quadrant-mounted) throttles wIth hIS nght hand, manipula ­mg a ' pectacle' con rol column with hIS left hand, and flymgfrom the lef -hand seat After the Tiger and the Harvard, theview from the fligh deck was much Improved.

Ruper Cooling trained on Oxfords wi h 15 SFTS atLossiemouth, early in the war:

[ found the Oxford a bit of a handful at first. True, myintroduction to it was somewhat abrupt. It had been threemonths before that we reserve pilots, mobilised on theoutbreak of war, had last flown. That had been on thegraceful Hawker Harts, Hinds and Audaxes which sailed theseas of the air in partnership with their pilots in a harmony ofpleasure and movement both effortless and naturaL If thatwas flying, to wear one's wings seemed utterly logIcaL

Perhaps hese regular airmen pilots who were to be theinstructors at Lossiemouth felt that these callow youthsneeded to be shown that flight was a dIscipline, not asporting pastime They gave us ten mmutes m the cockpit ofan Oxford to describe the instruments and controls, thenforty-five minutes dual to et the feel of the machine in theair; and finally two or hree landmgs - well, arnvals. Then'Off you go. Do at least four landings' the door slammed mthe slips ream and you were on your own.

The Oxford was easy 0 taxI and visibility was excellentIt rode fairly roughly over the grass airfields for theundercarnage was robust it had to be. Many aircraft werefitted WIth a turret aft of the port entrance door and, m early1940, instrument layout was far from standard. The BlindFlying Panel was here, but ancillary instruments, SWItchesnd minor controls tended to be pretty vanable.

Early take-offs were often crescent shaped until pilotsgot used to the swing, but once in the air the Oxford handledwelL It was responsive to the controls and generally stableSingle-engine flying was hard work, but was largely ademonstration exercise, as the Cheetah was a very rehablepower plant. Visibility was again excellent through anextensive clear vision canopy, and on approach, WIth flapsdown, the impression was one of diving towards the ground.The change of at itude with flaps down was pronounced and,for some reason, power-off approaches were standardMotoring m was discouraged and 'wheely' landings wereno considered fair. The result was an almighty heave on thestick to flare out, for the change of at itude from power offghde to three poin was substantiaL The pIrouettes of springlambs were reminiscen of SFTS Oxfords as pIlots put downhe tal!wheel first or dropped in from a foot or two, often onone wheel, but the aircraft seemed not to mmd.

ha was anathema to he Oxford was frost. Montrosehad five accidents one January morning m 1940 Most wereaircraft which failed 0 achieve flight and ground-looped orfmished in the upwind hedge, but one had managed to getairborne before coming to rest on the local railway SIgnalbox, much to the dismay of the signalman. When night flying,pilots there carried torches to scan the leading edges of the

wmgs for Ice before each take-offThe Oxfords were mce aeroplanes, good tramers,

unexcitmg but qUlte capable of generatmg a bIt of tensIon mthe hands of pupIl pilots

Don March. a much-travelled war Ime Air TrainingCorps cade , later 0 become a very expenenced pilot,scrounged abou fifty Oxford flights wi h 15 (P)AFU atRamsbury during 1943,

Very low flying WIth very steep turns was the order of theday, as were low-level cross-country flights We didmnumerable circuits and bumps, both by day and at mght, aswell as formation flights which I found particularly enjoyable.Day cross-countries lasting 11/2 2 hours were comple­mented by similar night flights which were termed 'beaconbashing' as the turning points in the blackout condItIonswere marked by red identifying beacons

From my personal experience and witnessing theInstructors' handling of the Oxford, I concluded it was a verymanoeuvrable aircraft, eminently suitable for its purpose.When two Oxfords were being tested at the same time, it wasa very good opportunity for a mock dogfight I rememberthmkmg at the tIme that It was a match for any Spitfire I

Gordon Kinsey was sta ioned at Lyneham duringthe winter of 1941/42:

When IJomed 0 14 SFTS at the Goatacre site, then known asRAF Lyneham, the resident Oxfords were pamted m woschemes, one bemg all-over brown and green camouflageon all upper and side surfaces, tramer yellow undersidesWIth black aIrcraft senal numbers Senal numbers on SIdeswere in yellow, equal width roundel colours and fin stripesand anti-gas dIamond patches on rear fuselage and wing tIp.The others carried the earlier style, camouflaged on top, butthe fuselage was only brown and green to the centrestringer on the fuselage side, yellow below that. Aircraftserial in black on rear fuselage.

The unit had over 100 Oxfords at that time, these being

AJispeed Oxford I EBB13 'LP-73' of No 237 OperationalConversion Unit at Benson in 1949,

(R, CB. Ashworth)

used for cross-country and mght flying by trainee LeadingAircraftsmen pl!ots, al ays flying m pam. Lyneham was hena small grass aerodrome surrounded by he hangars of No33 Maintenance Um, a far cry from he great aIrfield oftoday At mght the pupils tended to get mIxed up WIth theTiger Moths from 29 EFTS Clyffe Pypard across the valley

Operating at Lyneham from an of en muddy grassaIrfield, the Oxford s ood up remarkably well to the unkindconditIons, and often rough handling both on the ground andin he air An example of rough ground handhng was hataIrcraft were pIcketed around the perimeter track, and afterovernigh rain they were usually semi-bogged down in softmud, QUIte often gangs of lads, summoned by shouts fromchevroned COs of 'Two Six on this kite,' pushed andheaved on the leading edge of the tailplane and appliedshoulders to the undercarriage legs, whilst the more timidamong the gathering managed gently to lay their hands onthe leading edge of the centre section, with the full knowlegethat any exertions on that spot could lead to damage hencethe gentle approach.

More stringent methods were also manifest, and themost popular was to start the two Cheetahs, bring the oiltemperature up, and then with gangs of chaps putting theirshoulders up onto the undersurface, he motors were revvedup and hopefully the 'Oxbox' moved on to firmer terrain.Bouncing was often resorted to, but his usually only resultedin extending the oleo legs, Precautions had to be taken whencarrying out thIS procedure, the most impor ant being toensure that the locking struts, painted red and WIth a long

Airspeed Oxford I PH517 'FDCH' of No 1 (Not)Refresher Flying Uni at Finning1ey around 1949,

(via Wing Cdr C G, ]efford)

red s reamer, ere In posi ion locking the folding radIUSrods into the down positlOn This stiffened-up the undercar­nage and prevented the locking pins from moving ou ofposition should the hydraulic jack have crept up a bit.

Speaking of the locking stru s, it was the groundcrewsand the aircrews' duty to ensure that hese were removedbefore the aIrcraft moved prior 0 flight. This also applied tothe control locks, locking bar on the control column in thecockpit, and the slat locks on the ailerons, rudder andelevators,

A ask always allotted 0 small numbers of hegroundcrew w s the fixing of the tallwheel towmg tiller tothe s ools on he axle These spools were on each side of hefork, and a spnng- oaded claw engaged on a the spools Alever at the handle end was attached 0 a wire whIch wasconnected a he claws, and when Jl was pulled It opened theclaws and dIsengaged from he spools. One golden rulewhen usmg he tal! tiller was to ensure that the bod in heoffIce' kep the stick back 0 ensure a he elevators wereup and out of he way of the tiller handle

Airspeed Oxford Is including N]3B2 'P-D' of No 9Advanced Flying Training School at WellesboumeMountford around 1952.

(Official)

The Oxford was a comparatIvely easy aircraft tomaintain and its all-wooden construction stood up remarka­bly well to being picketed out in all weathers The onlyprotection was engine covers and the cockpit cover,although every Flight Hut had what seemed like enormouspiles of all-over mainplane and tailplane covers which werevery rarely used Shaped like a giant sleeve, they weremade from canvas, and even when dry weighed a ton. Whenwet they were almost impossible 0 slide off, and if put onbefore a frost were impossible to shift. Wheel covers werealways put on to preven engine oil dripping onto the tyres,Picketing points were located outboard of the motorsa tached to the mam spar, and a hole on the rear cone underthe rudder was used at he stem, Quite often this aperturewas covered WIth fabric, and doped over as It never seemedto be a really s rang pomt, and he screw picket was moregenerally screwed into the ground near the tail strut androped to It

o two Oxfords seemed to have the same flightcharacteristics, and dropped ei her he port or s arboardwing, the usual cure being to dope a length of elec ric flexon the trailing edge of the aileron If an aileron needed to bedepressed to lift that wing, the flex was pu on top to push thesurface down, and if the misalIgnment was severe theopposite remedy was also carried out on the other aileron,i,e, a strip was affixed underneath, The same remedy was

North American Harvard JIB FE992 was originally usedby the Royal Canadian Air Force, then sold postwar toSweden. It eventually became G-EDAM, and was thenpainted up with its original serial number, as seen hereat Old Warden in 1986. (Author)

Percival Prentice prototype TV163 during trials in May1946. (RAE'Museum Photo No PI00499)

construction by being all wood. It was faster than itsbiplane counterpart, but had a lower landing speed.

The Magister stemmed from the well-establishedM.2 Hawk series, the prototype of which (G-ACGH) hadmade its first flight on 29 March 1933 powered by a

SpecificationOne 130 hp de Havilland Gipsy Major JSpan 33 ft lain, length 25 ft 3 in, height 6 ft 8 in, wingarea 176 sq ft.Empty 1,260 lb, loaded 1,900 lb.Maximum speed 144 mph at 1,000 ft, cruising speed124 mph, initial climb 850 it/min range 380 miles,endurance 3 hrs, service ceiling 18, 000 ft.

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

The Miles Magister, known to numerous traineeRAF pilots as the 'Maggie', was a product of theprolific design team led by George Miles. A

contemporary of the Tiger Moth, it was the RAF's firstmonoplane trainer, but reversed the trend to metal

De Havilland Chipmunk T.W WD331 ~'of the FlyingSelection Squadron at Swinderby in 1987.

(F1t Lt Peter Bouch)

•p Cf ~-.l.'-

95 hp Cirrus III engine, and his was an instant success.The design was steadily developed, and a .130 hp deHavilland Gipsy Major engine was fitted m 1934 toproduce the Hawk Major, which attracted sufficientinterest from the Air Ministry for a specIal machme(K8626) to be ordered in 1936 for evaluation atFarnborough. Another improved variant fitted withdual controls, full blind flying equipment and vacuumoperated flaps was designated the Hawk Trainer. Thisformed the main equipmen of 0 7 Elementary andReserve Flying Training School at Woodley, whichopened in ovember 1936 and was opera ed byPhi lips and Powis Ltd, the builders of Miles aircraft.

All these machines were given manufac urer'stype numbers in the M.2 series, he first four HawkTrainers being designated M.2W. The next nmemachines were M.2Xs with a horn-balanced rudder ofgreater area, and the final twelve were M.2Ys withinternal modifications. The type number M.14 wasgiven, however, to the next development, designed toSpecifica ion TAO/36, whIch called for a low-wmgmonoplane elementary rainer 0 meet the need forinstruction in this ype of aircraft by pilo s who wouldshortly be flying the new monoplane fighters andbombers being built under the expansion scheme.Civil machines reflected their origin by being knownas Hawk Trainer IIIs, but the M.14A military version,which was essentially identical, was named theMagister.

In view of its already proven qualities, andsuccessful completion of trials, no proto ype wassought, and the design was ordered straight from thedrawing board, an initial contract being placed for 90aircraft. The main visible differences from the HawkMajor were larger cockpits equipped with blind flyingequipment, and a spa ted undercarriage. The firstmachine (L5912) was sent to Martlesham Heath on 14June 1937 for testing, and trials were well advancedwhen it unfortunately crashed on 22 July.

Despite this, the subsequent official report wasgenerally favourable, though it made quite a number ofcomments. The machine was repor ed to be stable atall speeds excep at he stall, which arose quickly andwi h a slight tendency to vibration and a swing to theright. For mos conditions it would fly straight wi h thefeet off he rudder bar, and such slight swing as mightdevelop was easily counteracted. In any event, it wasthought that if rudder bias was fitted it would flystraight with feet off under all conditions.

The cockpits, which were connected with the usualGosport tube with its faint smell of rubber, wereungenerous in size, though they offered no problems tothe average or small pilot. A large pilot, however,would only jus be able to achieve full aileron control ifhe sa in the rear cockpit, which was rather smallerhan the contemporary Tiger Moth, and much smallerhan the Avro Cadet being used by some of he

pre-war Reserve Schools. If he sat in the front cockpit,his knees would foul the control column.

Aileron control was generally responsive andeffective, except at the stall, when aileron drag wouldinduce a spin, but it was suggested that this could becured by increasing the differential action of theailerons. The feel of the controls was not very good if aside-slip was attempted while coming in to land withthe flaps down. The aircraft tended to swing against fullrudder into the direc ion of he side-slip and the nosewould drop, the rudder being insufficiently powerful tocounteract this. Lowering the flaps made he aircraftnose heavy, and adversely affected manoeuvrability.The aircraft was lost when it crashed into the RiverDeben, near Felixstowe, and was considered to havebeen unable to recover from a spin.

The accident to the test machine was not the onlyone, and the Magister began to earn the unwantedname of 'The Yellow Peril' in the press as furtheraccidents occurred. The company was mystified asthey had experienced no similar problems with eitherthe Magister or he Hawk Trainer. Finally, wind-tunneltests a Farnborough identified the cause of theproblem as being he enlarged cockpit openings fittedto the Magister, which tended to interfere WIth theairflow across the ail surfaces.

The lessons learned were applied to earlyproduction machines, and spinning trials were able tocontinue at Martlesham between 26 August and 2October, using L5933, the twenty-second production

Right:Miles Magister N3780 was delivered initially to No 15Elementary Flying Training School at RedhJJl In 1939.

(PhJJlips and POWiS)

Bottom right:Miles Hawk Trainer 1lI G-AFBS 'A' of No 8 Elementaryand Reserve Flying Training School at Woodley Thismachine was impressed dunng the war as BB66l.

(via Chaz Bowyer)

aircraft. This had he tailplane raised six inches, flat topdecking to the rear fuselage, flat fillets fitted at the rearend of the fuselage to merge into the leading edge ofthe tailplane, and a tail parachute anchored at the fmroot. To the relief of the manufacturers, the combmedeffect of these modifications proved totally effective incuring the earlier problems, and the Magister went onto equip a number of the wartime Elementary FlymgTraining Schools.

Below:Miles Magister L5933, an early production machine,being tested with the blind flying hood up at theAeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishmentat Martlesham Heath.

(MAP photo)

While L5933 was at Mar lesham Heath it was alsotested for ease of maintenance. In general i was foundo be satisfactory, though there was some criticism ofthe control cable, which would be time-consuming torepair as it was necessary to make splices in situ.There was also poor access to the countershaft in therear fuselage, and it was recommended that Im-provements be made to the elevator controls. . .

Experience in the schools led to further modifI­cations to later machines. The effect of rough treatmenton the solid-rubber tailwheel was too great in itsoriginal position, mounted on the fuselage sternpost.To overcome this, a sto t ply bulkhead was fitted someinches further forward, 0 which the tailwheel was thenfitted and this in turn was later replaced by apneu~atic Dunlop type. The rather flimsy enginecowling also gave trouble, and the ongmal two-pIeceversion, hinged at the centre-top, gave way to a morerigid three-piece type. A larger curved wmdscreenalso replaced the small angular one in the rear cockpIt.

Once these difficulties had been overcome,production steadily increased, reaching a peak of 15machines each week by 1941. The company was alsobusy with Mas er orders by this time, however, somuch of the work was sub-contracted, final assembly

• if ~-.I;'•

and es flying being at Woodley. They becamestandard ab Initio training equipment at a number ofthe pre-war civilian-opera ed Elemen ary and ReserveFlying Training Schools, and subsequently wi h severalwartime Elemen ary Flying Training Schools. the word'Reserve' having been dropped on mobilisation.Numbers also served with the Central Flying School atUpavon. Many were used for communica ions, and theyserved in every RAF Command, both at home andoverseas, A few machines of 8 EFTS were even fittedwith bomb racks in June 1940, these 'Maggiebombers'carrying eight 25 Ib bombs in underwing racks,dropped by pulling on a cockpit handle connected byBowden cables to quick release pins.

The Magister had an unremarkable career in theelementary schools. Pupils flying one for the first timewould be told by their instructor to start with a gentletake-off, then climb slowly at about 5 mph above therecommended speed. Once they had reached 3,000feet or more they would be told to level off, by thenhaving sufficien al i ude to be able to recover from anymanoeuvres they might a tempt. When the ime camefor landing, they were to approach downwind, closethe throttle, then readjus he trim and hold the speed at65 mph. Checking round to ensure no other aircraftwas approaching, the speed was increased to 70 mph,then a gliding turn brough the machine into wind. Theflaps were then lowered for the final approach to thegrass-covered airfield,

After the war, many surviving Magisters weresold, and in civilian guise as Hawk Trainer IIIs, were afamiliar sigh for many years. Despite he numbers

which were around at one time, however, i does notappear to have imprinted i self so well on the memoryas did many 0 her trainers, A few recollections havebeen forthcoming, however.

Dick Smerdon flew in Magis ers for only a shorttime:

It was a pleasant little aircraft, but perhaps of the few hours Iflew m her, or perhaps because it was ordinary, it lef nolasting impression, I do remember mstrument flying underhe hood, though, and how my examiner up front wascovered in oil after an inverted spin recovery.

Wing Commander Robert Sage flew Magistersoccasionally:

I first flew a Magister in January 1938 (L5983), They wereestablished as Station Flight aircraft, and were used forcontinuation training and communications. I did not fly thema great deal, but I see from my log book that between 1938and 1940 I flew seven different Magisters. I remember thembest for the fact that they were the only light aircraftestablished at bomber stations providing an opportunity formore ebullien flying than was possible, or permitted, withthe monoplane bombers introduced at that time. The onlymCldent I recall relates to a MagIster at Finningley whenPercy Pickard, hen a flying officer, was climbing mto thecockpit for his first familiansation flight and pu his foot righthrough the floor l

MIles Magister R1B53 of No 15 Elementary FlyIngTraInIng School at KIngstown In 1940.

(Author's collection)

Rupert Cooling flew the Magis er as a pre-warreservist at Brough, and his memories are s ill quitevivid:

In Apnl 1938, the MagIS er was a noveIty; It had enteredserVIce barely six months before Three were Issued to theBlackburn-operated 0 4 Elementary and Reserve FlyingTraining School at Brough, being L6910, L69 ,and L6912,and they were newer still In lieu of the normal 130 hp GipsyMajor engme, they were fitted with the locally-producedBlackburn CIrrUS Major power plant of 150 hp, Intended foruse m the trainmg of short service commission pIlots, theywere not normally available to the RAFVR pllots who flewBlackburn B,2s at the same school.

However, for one youth of eighteen and six foot seventall, the B.2 was a bit cramped. Not noticeably so, but the CFldecided that things would be better in the Maggie, After fivereasonably comfortable hours dual on the biplane, it was allchange, start again on a sleek monoplane half as fast again,which had somehow acquired a sinister reputation as to itsspinning characteristics I did not help the pupil in that eachinstructor was keen to tryout the Maggie, There seemedalways to be a different silhouette in the front cockpit; adifferent voice down the Gosport tube.

These early Magisters differed from their later siblings.The flaps were operated mechanically by a large brake-stylelever mounted on he starboard side of the cockpit, whichhad to be hauled up 0 bring down the flaps. This meant thaton final approach, at about four hundred feet, it wasnecessary to switch hands from left on the throttle and righton he stick, to left on the stick and right on the flap lever.Another quick SWItch of the hands res ored the pupil pilot tothe established convention as he sought to stabilise the newglide angle and get the speed down (or up) to 65 knots, Itwas an added and unwelcome difficulty.

The Maggie had other tricks up its sleeve. If a pupilover-ruddered a turn, the outer wing would rise and thenose went down, The instinctive reaction was to haul back onthe stick when the elevators, in a bank, accentuated the turnand the rudder became blanked by the skidding aircraftThe aircraft then encountered a sort of powered sideslipfrom which recovery was effected by centralising thecontrols and regaining normal attitude, It was disconcerting,not to say frightening, until the instructor, also somewhatfoxed by the manoeuvre, decided to take over and sortthings out.

On 16 June 1938, all Magisters were grounded, Theprevious afternoon a young ew Zealander took off in L6910from Brough to carry ou circuits and landings, On hissecond approach, the aircraft suddenly nipped over into aspin and fell in to the Humber. When a boat reached him, hewas dead, probably drowned while unconscious followingthe impact. It did not help the young reservist who, aftergoing solo in L6912, suddenly found himself persistentlyunder or overshooting on every approach, The CFI'scheck-out would determine his future; if he fluffed it, thatwould be the end of flying training,

Confidence was not enhanced when the instructorclimbed to 4,000 ft and tried, wholly successfully, to induce acouple of spins off gliding turns. The sudden lurch, the rapiddownward spiral, the delayed recovery dId little to dispelapprehensions, The subsequent approach to the airfield

above a yellow tail section bobbing in the water beneath asthe wreck of L6910 was brought ashore was not conducive toa textbook landmg The week's reprieve offered was smallcomfort. but the next day there were no Magisters to fly.Forty mmutes refresher on a B.2 was to begin sIxteen yearsand four thousand hours of flying

For the Maggie, it was back to the drawing board. Itre-emerged with a taller fin and rudder, and pneumaticallyopera ed flaps, It was discovered that the pupIl's head andthe folded canvas hood for blind flying blanketed the airflowaround the rudder, reducing effectiveness in pitch and yaw,Modified, the Magister was a trainer many remember withpleasure, even affection, I would have been nice to meet thegentler, more amenable younger brother, if only to prove tooneself that the tiger had been tamed,

Verdun Edwards, a wartime engine fitter, learnedto fly a post-war civilianised Magister (Hawk TrainerIII):

I had been used to flying the Auster, and I expected similarresponses from the agister. I thought, for instance, that inthe stall the Magister would drop the port wing every time,as I had been used to, but it didn't It was such a cleanaeroplane that if there was a little bit of disturbance on thestarboard wing when coming up to the stall, that one woulddrop, The first tlme I tried a stall in the Magister I wasexpec ing he por wing 0 go down as usual, when suddenlythe cockpit came round and hit me in the right ear. As I wasgoing down I was thinking at first about the pain in my earrather than recovering from the spin, but I q ickly go out ofit I had been taught that 5,000 feet was the minimum heightfor practlsing a spin and if you were not out of I by 2,500feet you were to jump and use your parachute butfortunately the MagIster responded all right.

The thing one had to remember was that if, whenspinning, the aircraft autorotated to the left, then you mustuse right rudder to stop the autorotation, As soon as theautorotation stopped, you pushed the stick forward, to take itoff the stall, and then you had complete recovery, evenwithout the engine. If you were going to do some othermanoeuvre, such as a roll, you had to put some power on,but you didn't need the engine to recover flight attitude andcontrol.

The ailerons on the Magister were very lively, On theAuster, if you put the stick over, the wing went over abouttwo seconds later, but if you put it too far over on theMagister you were on your back in no time, That made it agood trainer, as a good trainer must have vices, and youmust learn to react quickly, Some aircraft were far too docileto be of any real use as trainers, bu the agister really hadto be own. On one occasion I bent one a bit landing in aslight crosswmd, There was a momentary gust and I pushedthe throttle, but the rudder wasn't effective enough to checkit, and the oleo leg was ripped, othing was said, however ­it happened all the tlme, apparently

Take-offs were very stable. You followed the usualprocedure throttle open, stick forward, and as soon as thetail was up the rudder became effective and you hadcomplete control. You could then correct your direction uphe runway, and it would leave the ground on its own at

65 mph and climb out. It was a beautiful aeroplane. You were

• t

clean taking off, you didn't use any Oap.If you were going to do aerobatics, you had to make

certain you removed the battery before taking off, as laiddown mthe Pilot's otes. The battery was housed in a box 0

the pilot's left. It was very heavy, and was supported by ametal bracket screwed into the wooden frame of the aircraft.If it were left in the box during aerobatics it would be pulledout of its holdings and inOlct structural damage on thewooden airframe. The Magister was therefore strictlynon-aerobatic with the battery in, and only aerobatic with itout you couldn't change your mind once you were in theair, as the g-forces on the battery would be quite heavy in aroll.

MIles Magister N3838 '3' of the Empire Central FlyingSchool at Hullavington in October 1942.

(MAP photo)

Another stipulation was that you must have a parachute ­though I found a cushion much more comfortable to sit on.With three of these I had a better view and I enjoyed it. Atfirst I had a rather large instructor, and I wasn't getting ontoo well because from the back seat I couldn't see verymuch. I would tend to lean round him to see, and the wingwould then go down. Then one day I had a new instructorwho was much smaller. 'Jump in', he said to me, 'sit down, sit

in position'. He looked at me, then said, 'You are too low.Jack your seat up,' so I pumped the seat up 'That's better',he said, 'but you need a cushion underneath that suit', so hewent and got me one and Igot up, put It where he pack wentand sat down 'Fine,' he saId He then climbed mup front andsaid, 'S art up, and take off m your own time' Whils he wasfiddlmg around putting his straps on, I was taxiing out, and Ifound I could now see the runway I could see through bo hhis windscreen and mine. What a difference l We wereairborne, I did hree approaches and he got out and said,'There's nothing wrong with you'.

He was a very good instructor. He would talk to me; hewould say - 50 knots - 70 knots, climb out - 500 feet, turn left90 degrees check for drift look at the runway - 800 feet,throttle back - nose down. When [ went solo I found his voicewas still with me - 500 feet, turn left check for drift (whichmeans that you look at the runway, and if it is sliding awayyou are drifting, so you have to counteract it); 800 feet - nosedown - throttle back (because you are accelerating a bit),level off, Oy parallel to the runway, check your drift again sothat you are not crabbing in or crabbing out, check therunway, go well past the runway, turn, 500 feet, finals, Oapsdown and halt. He was there, he was with me and I couldhear him talking.

Verdun was also familiar with the Magister'sengine:

The Gipsy Major engine on the Magister had four cylinders,inverted pushrod jobs on a common crankcase, so therockers were underneath. The lids on the rocker-boxeswere filled by hand from the ground. Every 30 hours youreleased a screw in the middle, pulled the box down and putoil in up to he arrowed level. It had a cork gasket, and yougently put this back and then turned the screw up with ascrewdnver. You also checked the hot and cold clearanceson the tappets I used to do it cold, because if you did themwhen they were hot you invariably burned your fingers, andyou were then not getting a proper feel, but cold clearanceswere no problem. The tappets only had a double lock nut,and a centre slot for the screwdriver and a spanner, so youloosened the lock nut just like a motor bike. You then put thefeeler-gauge in, nipped it, locked, removed the screwdriverand rechecked the clearances with the feelers. They werevery easy to -work on.

D espite the obvious need for a high speedmonoplane trainer, with the advent of fastfighters in this configuration, no attempt

was made to order such a type at the time that theHurricane and Spitfire were being conceived. Noteveryone was convinced that such a machine wasunnecessary, however, and George Miles used hispowers of persuasion within the Phillips and Powiscompany to allow him to build just such a design as aprivate venture. The timing was fortunate, as in 1936 asubstantial interest in the company had been acquiredby Rolls-Royce, who gave the new project their fullsupport.

The Rolls-Royce Merlin engine was by that timegoing into large-scale production, and consequentlylarge numbers of the earlier Kestrel engines werelikely to become surplus, but the design was still in fullproduction. Miles therefore adopted this well-provenengine, and the firm's new backers produced a specialversion at no cost to Phillips and Powis, whothemselves were restructured, with George Milesbecoming their new managing director as well as chiefdesigner. The clean new aircraft design emerged witha 745 hp Kestrei XVI, and the prototype machine wasalso given the name Kestrel. Although it was neverfitted, the machine was also stressed to take the

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

Specification (Mark II)One 870 hp Bristol Mercury 20 or 30.Span 35 ft 8 in, length 29 ft 6 in, height 11 ft 6 in, wingarea 209 sq ft.Empty 4,262lb, loaded 5,673 lb.Maximum speed 243 mph at 7,500 ft, cruising speed208 mph, initial climb 2,000 ft/min, range 450 miles,endurance 2 hrs, service ceiling 28,000 ft,

• 51; ~-.r.1,030 hp Merlin, which if it h d materialised wouldhave given it an outstanding performance.

Carrying the manufacturers marking U5, theproto ype had is maiden flight at Woodley pilo ed byits designer on he evening of 3 June 1937, andachieved a top speed of 296 mph, not very far short 0

that of the new fighters which the new breed of pilotswould fly, and certainly faster than the previousgeneration of fighters. Being far in advance of anythingpreviously produced, it was by no means perfect, oneearly fault being a nasty habit the undercarriage had oflowering itself again soon after being retrac ed.

evertheless, despite its outs anding performance,wi h a top speed only a few miles per hour less than theHurricane fighters then entering service, it was notinitially considered as suitable for the RAF, the AirMinistry regarding it as premature and ahead of itstime.

In the meantime Specification T.6/36 had beenissued for an advanced low wing medium-poweredmonoplane pilot trainer for the RAF. The industry wasby hat time engaged in he expansion programme,and all the main manufacturers had full order books,but nevertheless Avro and de Havilland showedsufficient interest in this new concept to submit designs.Of these two, the Air Minis ry preferred the D.H.93design, and orders were placed straight from thedrawing board for 250 machines of this type, 0 benamed he Don. To save ime, he firs productionmachine (L2387), powered by a 525 hp de HavillandGipsy King I engine, served as a prototype withmanufacturer's marking E-3, making its first flight inearly June 1937, the same month that he Miles Kestrelappeared. The specification, however, had urned outo be an impossible one to meet fully, and the Don wastherefore inevi ably a compromise.

The respective timings of he first fligh s soon gavean opportunity for comparison. Both machines weredemonstrated at the 1937 RAF Display at Hendon on 26June, and also on the following two days at that year'sSBAC Display a Ha field. The con rasting impressionsgiven a hese shows by he two machines, with theirvery differen power and performance, led to a hastyofficial re hink, and a pro otype Kestrel was orderedfor tes ing.

Production of the Don was in the meantime cutback to only fifty machines, the majority of which sawonly limited service. None of he Flying TrainingSchools for which hey had been intended were everequipped with hem, mos seeing service only ass ation hacks or ground instruc ional machines.

Whe11 the prototype service Kestrel (N3300)appeared in October 1938, it was fitted with a largernose radiator, but this caused problems with weightdistribution. A production order was placed on 11 June1938 for 500 machines, and when these appeared theyhad he radiator posi ioned underneath he wing roots.

A few other minor modifications were necessary on theproduction version, and the first deliveries of theMaster I, as it had now become, were made in July1939, shortly before the outbreak of war. The ailplanewas raised fractionally, he fin and rudder had agreater area and the depth of the rear fuselage wasincreased. The power plant was now the derated715 hp Kestrel XXX, becoming available from surplussupplies. This drop in power resulted in a much lowertop speed, but this was still sufficient for the machine tobe justifiably claimed as the fastest trainer in the worlda that ime. A second order was placed for a further400 Kestrel-powered machines, and these weredis inguished by having a aller, improved windscreen,in which form they were designated the Master IA.

The Master reversed the trend towards stressed­skin metal structures, being of wooden construction,which was seen as having several advantages.Provided the design was kep simple, aircraft could bebuil more quickly in wood than in me ai, and in heevent of war, the country had plen y of skilledcarpenters and ample supplies of raw rna erial.Consequently there should be less competition for thescarce materials and labour which would be requiredfor operational machines - though production of the deHavilland Mosquito and later of gliders would serve toreduce he validi y of this argumen . Wooden cons ruc­tion cer ainly enabled the machine to go quickly in 0produc ion, the fuselage and wings being assembledindependen ly, then joined on one of the two parallelproduction lines.

To make layout of the aircraft as near as possible totha of the first line machines to which the pupils wouldgraduate, it was fitted with a andem cockpit, whichalso helped per ormance. The Kes rei engine hadalready acquired a good reputation for ex remereliability, and it would provide experience ofwater-cooled engines. The design was as aerodynami­cally clean as any machine of its generation, butconsiderable thought had been given to ease ofmaintenance, _most of the equipment being easilyinstalled or removed. -The canopy hinged on thestarboard side, to open sideways.

The sligh Iy-tapered wings had been made stiff andvery thick, with he fron spar con inuing through thelower fuselage. The wings were constructed in threeelements comprising two outboard panels and acentre-section, the latter having anhedral to giveimproved clearance for he propeller blades and tomake a clean junction with the fuselage. The design ofhe fuselage was an oval semi-monocoque, comprisingspruce frames and longerons skinned by stressedplywood. The tailwheel was positioned to aid easyrecovery from a spin. The main retractable Lockheedundercarriage was situated in the deep wings, thewheels rotating through 90 degrees as they wen up, toenable them 0 lie flat between the wing spars.

Above:The lll-fated de Havllland Don was bullt to meetSpecification T.6/36, but was ousted by the MllesMaster. This is £-3, powered by the Gipsy King J

---

Below:The first production Mlles Master Is being prepared fordelivery. The nearest machine is N74ll which wastaken over by the Admlralty in 1940 and used initiallyby No 759 Squadron at £astleigh.

(Author's collection)

~.."'"I:

Although normally flown from the front seat, it wasdesigned so that landings could be made by pupils inthe back seat. They would commence their trainingfrom this position, then half way through the coursewould exchange places with the instructor. A retract­able rear windscreen could be raised to give a betterview over the front occupant when landing or takingoff. The rear seat was capable of being raised twelveinches for this purpose, and the rudder-bar wasadjusted at the same time. The canopy frame had a builtin roll-bar between the two seats, to protect the crewshould the machine overturn. The front windscreenincorporated an optical panel to provide undistortedreflector sight vision for gun-firing.

Despite the attention given to good all-roundvision, it became apparent after the machine enteredservice that in practise the view was rather restricted.This was remedied by fitting a much taller windscreen,giving improved visibility to both the pupil andinstructor, and with other modifications this versionwas restyled the Mark IA.

The success of the machine meant that stocks ofsurplus Kestrel engines, mainly available due to theobsolescence of the many pre-war Hawker biplanevariants, would be insufficient for any further ordersthat might be placed, and due to their Merlincommitments no more would be produced byRolls-Royce. After assurances that there were,however, ample stocks of Bristol Mercury radialengines available, since these were still in productionfor the Blenheim, the aircraft was redesigned to takethis power plant, and N7422, which had been laid downas the fifteenth production Mk I, flew at Woodley inNovember 1939. Two months later this crashed whilebeing test flown from Boscombe Down, but the tests

Miles Master fA taking off, its undercarriage twisting tofit into the WingS as it retracts.

(Author's collection)

were satisfactorily completed on N7447, the secondsuch conversion, only for the manufacturers to be toldthat supplies of the Mercury would not after all bereadily forthcoming, being required for otherpurposes.

Instead, the immediate substitution was required ofthe new American-built Pratt and Whitney Wasp Juniorengine. Supplies were ordered from America andN7994, another Mk I conversion, flew with this early in1940. In the event, both engines became available, andso each version was produced in some numbers.Ironically, each of these enforced changes of engineproduced benefits. In the case of the Mk II, theadditional power of the Mercury as compared with theKestrel was more than iJ.mple to offset the effect of thegreater frontal area. Pilots of the Mk III on the otherhand, benefited from an improved view due to thesmaller cowling diameter.

In production, the Mark II, fitted with either aMercury XX or 30, differed from the prototype inhaving the wings shortened by over three feet,extended exhaust pipes and a larger airscrew spinner.The clipped wings, which were intended to reducestress on the centre section of the gull-shaped wing,were also introduced on many of the Mark Ills, both ofthese versions having sliding cockpit canopies whichmoved very easily. A proposed Mark IV wascommenced, machine T8886 being intended to have amodified centre section and tailplane, and a redesig­ned rear cockpit giving improved all-round visibility

for the instructor, but this was never completed. Aprojected Mark V with either Mercury or Wasp enginefailed to materialise, and production came to a halt in1942 after nearly 3,500 aircraft had been built, to bereplaced by the Martinet target-tug, which employedmany Master components.

The first thing that struck a trainee about thecontrols of the Mk II, as with the earlier versions, wasthat they were convenient and on the whole simple tooperate. This was not a common feature at that time,and demonstrated the thought given to this aspect bythe designers. There was one potential pitfall,however. The levers for flaps and undercarriage werenicely situated behind the pedestal, but were adjacentto each other. Although the undercarriage lever waslonger and required more effort, it was far fromunknown for a trainee pilot to lose his concentrationsufficiently to select the wrong lever, to the detrimentof both the aircraft and his own prospects of beingallowed to finish his course.

Take-off could raise the flow of adrenalin in thetrainee, as everything seemed to happen at once afterhe had opened the throttle and lifted the tail. The highpower-weight ratio gave an exceptional acceleration,and as the aircraft rushed down the runway the pilothad to apply full left rudder to prevent it veeringoff-course. Once airborne it climbed rapidly, thehigh-pitched note of the Mercury engine being audiblefor some distance.

The Master had its limitations when performingaerobatics. This was particularly noticeable in a roll,which had to be started from a nose-up position,otherwise it was likely to end in a rather scrappyshallow dive. Landing was seldom a problem, as thelarge flaps enabled the aircraft to land in a very limited

space, with minimal prospect of an overshoot. Itssubsequent arrival for parking was accompanied byseveral squeals from the undercarriage.

From late 1941, over 400 Master lIs were shippedto South Africa for use by Air Schools for pilot training,but they were not a success. Bad packing for thevoyage resulted in structural failure and shrinkage,and this combined with a lack of spares resulted in analarmingly low serviceability rate of around 20 percent. The problems steadily increased, and for a shorttime it was impossible to use them for front gun firing.By March 1942 it had been decided to replace themwith Harvards, but not until the end of that year did thisprove possible.

The Mklll differed very little from the Mkll, apartfrom the engine, which although noisy had oneadvantage. When taxiing, and during take-off, thesmaller diameter of the Pratt and Whitney comparedwith the Mercury gave a rather better view for thepilot. All three main versions saw service in numbers,and the Fleet Air Arm took over quite a few dozen MkIsand Mklls for their various pilot training establishmentsaround the country. The Master served for much of thewar with RAF, mainly at (Pilot) Advanced Flying Unitsand Service Flying Training Schools, and also as a tugfor Hotspur gliders with Glider Training Schools, butby the end of 1944 they were being rapidly replacedby Harvards.

Miles Master fA T8665 '11' of No 5 (Pilot) AdvancedFlying Unit at Ternhlll around 1943.

(via Cs. Leslie)

•

Above:Miles Master II W869l, fitted with the 870 hp BristolMercury engine, undergOing tnals with the Aeroplaneand Armament Expeninental Establishment at Ba­scombe Down before being issued to the CentralFlying School.

(Author's collection)

BelowMiles Master III W8656 '7' in the company of anothermachine from No 5 Service Flying Training School atTernhJll in 1942, with a WAAF rigger as passenger.This photograph shows well the rear seat adjustmentfacility.

(Author's collection)

Miles Master I N7572 of No 5 Service Flying TrainingSchool at Sealand being refulled

(R.D. Cooling)

Rupert Cooling flew various Mas ers:

The Master could be a bit of a bully boy. The Mark I, ahandsome machine, looked fast, sleek and aggressive. It wasreputed to shed its wings under circumstances which variedwith the teller of the tale, however, and cer ainly it was muchless m evidence after 1940 Is successors, he Marks II and1Il, were radial engined; less elegan, more bruisers thanballerinas.

No 516 (Combined Operations) Squadron held a MasterII; its Mercury engine provided some compatibility with theunit's Blenheim IVs. It was intended as a trainer to converttwin-engine pilots to the Hurricanes, Mustang and evenLysanders with which the squadron was equipped Most ofthose pilots, however, were sufficiently experienced toessay their first solo on type without the need of formalsingle-engine refresher Dying, so the aircraft was httle used.It was handy for visits 0 aIrfields, for taking and collectingpeople or for giving the Army and Navy grandstand views ofexercises, but was not particularly sought after as a mount.The windscreen and side panels tended to become filmedwith atomised oil from the engine, so the pilots perpetuallypeered at a landscape framed in mim-rainbows. The cockpitwas comfortable and roomy; the controls positive and,

rainbows and taxiing apart, visibility was above average.The undercarriage gave a hard ride, particularly on the

Somerfeldt tracking runway and PSP taxiways of RAFDundonald. The tail came up almost as soon as the throttlewas opened; lift off and climb were rapid. oisy, it resentedcareless handling It would spin off a steep urn if the stickwere pulled too far back; sImilarly If too much rearwardpressure were applied on going into a loop, the airframewould buffet as it approached the vertical. Simpler topretend that, all along, it was a stall turn which had beenintended, by applying rudder and closing the throttle Likemost Miles desig~s, the Master spun with enthusiasm and amargm of heIght for Mum and the family was a prudentprOVIsIon when undertaking such manoeuvres.

There are few, If any, erstwhile pHots who go dreamyeyed at the mention of the Master, as do others whenspeaking of Spitfires, Hurricanes, Wellingtons , Lancasters,even Ansons. It was there to be Down, and Down it was. It dida job; taught many a tyro to treat aeroplanes with respect. Itreminded those with experience that it was not to be triDedwith

Squadron Leader 'Colly' Collingridge, a formerBattle of Britain Spi fire pilot, recalls:

I started Dying Masters with the Central Flying School atUpavon in November 1941. The course ended in January1942 and I was then posted to No 9 Service Flying TrainingSchool a Hullavington as an instructor until March 1942 whenI was posted to 0 5 SFTS Ternhill The umt became an

•

Advanced Flying Unit soon after I arrived, and I remained atTernhill until August 1943 when I went out to Canada, againinstructing.

We had some Mark Is at Hullavington, but did very littleinstruction on them. They were old machines, and thereforemainly used by the students for solo flying. The instructorsused the limited number of lIs and IIIs, until the Is weregradually phased out. They were either broken up beyondrepair or they ran out of time, and were slowly replaced bythe lIs and IIIs.

One significant difference between the II and the III wasthat the prop went round the other way. I have seen itsuggested that this must have been confusing, but I neverfound it so. One knew one was in a Mercury-engined MasterII, and one simply expected the propeller to go round theopposite way from the Master III, and in any case would onlynotice this on take-off. The trims were a little bit different, butyou knew this from the Pilots' Notes, so you would just checkthe trims and away you would go. There couldn't be anyconfusion between the two versions, because the Mercuryengine had a massive cowling, so it was obvious whichengine it was.

The Mark II was faster with the Mercury engine, whichhad plenty of power. Later they clipped off the tips of thewings to make it even faster. They were able to do thisbecause the Master was a very strong machine, especiallythe wings, which had a very thick chord.

The view from the back seat was quite good, especiallycompared with Spitfires. It could be raised and lowered togive a better view during take-off and landing. You couldsee quite well at the side, but you couldn't see over the topof the pilot, though you could see enough for landing. Onecould peer round the pupil, of course, and Idon't recall everhaving any real difficulties.

One had the seat in the lower position for aerobatics andgeneral flying, though the control column then seemeduncomfortably high. The normal position was with the

control column low down between your legs, but there was alimiting speed for the rear hood of the Master to be open,and when you dropped your seat down after take off it didn'tseem natural with the spade grip of the control column infront of your face.

On one or two occasions I have been out through thehood, usually during a~robatics with some ham student,mainly because the seat had a habit of not locking properly.If you didn't get it right into the notch, your seat would go upand you would hit the hood, even though you were stilltightly in your straps. You would then get a nasty knock onthe head and the hood would flip up. The hood was hinged inthe corner, and after take off you would pull a handle on thetop and it would come down in front of you.

The Mark I, being water-cooled, was prone to glycolleaks, especially the older machines, and you would getglycol coming out - usually from a head gasket. This thenburnt, causing white smoke to be ejected through theexhaust stubs making it difficult to see for landing. The viewin the Mark I was better, though, with its narrower in-lineengine.

The Master undercarriage seemed to stand up very wellto the treatment it received from pupils. It was well bracedand very wide, which helped to make it stable. Wepreferred the Mark II for night flying, probably because ofthe extra power.

I was waiting to take off in a Master one day in January1942 at Hullavington, while the runways were underconstruction. Things were not too well organised, andaircraft were taking off and landing on two different parts ofthe grass. Suddenly I saw a Master directly in the path of onetaking off. The pilot of the former evidently saw the onetaking off, and tried to accelerate out of the way, but failed tomake it, and the other aircraft sliced his fuselage in half. Itwas lucky that there was no-one in the back seat, and afterthe remains came to rest he was able to stagger out of thefront half, dazed but relatively unharmed.

W ith war imminent, it was apparent thatBritain would be unable to meet its ownaircraft requirements, and home produc­

tion would be largely concentrated on operationaltypes. Accordingly orders were placed with Americanmanufacturers to fill the gap. Apressing need was for amodern advanced trainer, and hopes had been pinnedon the de Havilland Don, but this had turned out to be a

[M (Q) [Jir [h]~ 0lJlJ ®[J 0©©)[ru

[}={] @[JW@[J@

I.

failure. Its place would be taken by the Miles Kestrel,developed as the Master, but this was unlikely to beavailable for some time, and as a stop-gap an orderwas placed for an adaptation of the North AmericanBC-l, a robust machine already supplied to the USArmy Air Corps. Ironically, the Harvard as it becamewith the RAF, long outlasted the Master.

Power plant:Dimension:

Weights:Performance:

Specification (Mark lIB)One 600 hp Pratt and Whitney Wasp R-1340-AN-1.Span 42 it 01/4 in, length 28 it 11 in, height 11 it 81/2in, wing area 253 sq it.Empty 3,995 lb, loaded 5,235 lb.Maximum speed 180 mph at 5,000 it, cruiSing speed140 mph, initial climb 1,300 it/min, range 750 miles,endurance 3. 9 hrs, service ceiling 22,400 it.

• ) ;

~_.I,"f

Powered by a Pratt and Whitney Wasp R-1340­S3Hl engine, the initial order was for 200 machines,and the deliveries commenced in December 1938, Thefirst machine (N7000) was sent to Martlesham Heath fortesting, but was lost when it dived into the ground atEyke, Suffolk on 16 February 1939, Testing continuedwith N7001 and N7013, however, and a report wasmade at the end of the year.

The report made two main criticisms, Visibilityforward from the front seat was below average, asevere handicap for a training aircraft, especially fortaxiing, take-off and landing, It was even worse fromthe rear seat due to the strong-point between the seatsThe view in other directions was good, however. Alever fitted on later aircraft enabled the front seat to beraised, which helped the pupil, but it increased theproblems of the instructor in the back seat, who nowhad to lean sideways to get much of a view,

The other problem was noise An electric intercomwas fitted, but this only proved satisfactory at lowspeed as the microphones picked up considerableexternal noise, and it was impossible to hear properlywhile taking off or climbing, or when flying at highcruising speeds or above, The raucous sound of theHarvard was very noticeable externally, It was easilydistinguishable from other aircraft, this feature beingdiagnosed as due to the high tip speed of thedirect-drive airscrew, the pitch of the resulting note,rather than its volume, being instinctively seized by theear. This noise reached its peak in the plane of theaircraft, and the problem was never eliminated, as canbe readily heard on surviving Harvards,

Following the initial delivery, a further 200 Mark Iswere ordered, many of which served in SouthernRhodesia, These were followed by the Mark II, basedon the AT-6 for the USAAF, with squared off wing tipsand a triangular fin and rudder, these features beingretained on subsequent versions, The rear fuselagewas of a light alloy monocoque, in place of the earlierfabric covered steel tubing, Some Mark lIs also went toRhodesia, but the majority were retained in Canada forschools set up under the British Commonwealth AirTraining Plan,

One of the few Mark lIs to reach the UnitedKingdom was BD134, which in January 1941 took part incomparative tests with the Mark I at the Aeroplane andArmament Experimental Establishment at BoscombeDown, Its handling characteristics were found to besimilar to those of the MkI. It behaved satisfactorily in adive, and recovery from a spin was certain, Behaviourin the stall was essentially the same, though there hadbeen no improvement in the large height loss whichoccurred in this manoeuvre, During climb, both thecylinder and oil inlet temperatures were withinpermissible limits for tropical summer conditions, butthe oil tended to run hot in level flight. this did notmatter in nermal English summer conditions, but was

likely to cause difficulties in RhodesIa,The next version to appear was the AT-6C, which

became the Harvard IIA in RAF parlance, this having aplywood rear fuselage, The Wasp R-1340-S3Hl of theearlier marks was replaced by the Wasp R-I340-ANl,having only a short exhaust stub on the starboard side,as opposed to the long one of the Mkll, A batch of 747 ofthese went mainly to the Middle East, Rhodesia andNew Zealand, They were followed by the Mark lIB, theequivalent of the American AT-6A, built in largenumbers under licence in Canada by the Noorduyncompany, and used not only by the RAF but by allCommonwealth countries participating in the trainingplan, The final RAF version was the Mark III,corresponding to the AT-6D, all these Americanversions being known as Texans in the USAAF, Totalproduction for the RAF and BCATP was 4905 machines,

The Harvard was a very strong machine, but couldbe dangerous if not properly handled, Pupils graduat­ing from elementary machines could have greatdifficulty controlling it initially, It could flick suddenly,without warning, and would flick stall if looped too fast,Landings could be disastrous if the tail was held toohigh, and pupils were instructed not to throttle backuntil both main wheels were firmly on the ground,Even when the tail had come down it was not safe torelax, as the aircraft was' prone to ground looping

Don March graduated to Harvards from Prentices:

We Prentice pilots regarded the Harvard as a hot ship, andlooked forward to Oying them. Senior courses would fill uswith stories about them swinging wildly off the runwayduring the landing run, and the very real probability ofcatching a wingtip, Some of us succeeded in getting those'Wingtrips' to our shame, as Harvards needed somecontrolling during crosswind landings, I have heard a veryexperienced wartime Canadian pilot say that if you could Oya Harvard you could Oy anything,

Obviously the rate of climb was better than that of thePrentice, but more power would have been welcome,During aen2batics, one preserved height, not wishing to losetoo much, as one had to·climb up again to above 3,000 ft to beable to continue, which took time and one wanted not towaste any time at all during a 45 minute Oight.

Harvards enjoyed the privilege of landing and taking offfrom the runway, whilst the Prentices had to land on thegrass area to the left of the runway, Consequently therewere mixed circuits, with Harvards and Prentices at differentspeeds, a practice which would be considered undesirabletoday and probably would not be allowed,

Flaps and undercarriage levers were immediately nextto each other, thus presenting the distinct danger ofselecting Oap instead of undercarriage and vice versa, Toavoid this, whenever one moved the undercarriage lever, ITWAS ALWAYS WITH ACLENCHED FIST, but when handlingthe Oap selector lever, one grasped it. So you had theclenched fist and grasping syndrome, which definitelyhelped to avoid wrong selection.

However, one of our chaps on a senior course, near to

getting his wings, was on a night cross-country solo at about2,000 ft cruising level and Oying along quite happily in thepitch dark when his engine started failing, He did the rightthmg, undId hls straps and started leaving the cockpit to baleout, as you cannot do a forced landing at night in opencountry wIth much chance of success, He was just about toleap out when the engine picked up, so he got back in again,whIch turned out to be a mistake, He had just strapped inagain when the engine again started to fail. He again went tobale out, and the engine once more picked up, All the timehewas getting in and out, however, he was losing valuableheIght. In the end, the engine failed completely, by whichtIme he was too low to bale out, so he was committed tomaking a forced landing at night wheels up, of course. As itwas very dark he could not see where to land, so did notknow whether he was above woods or other obstacles,

This is where the clenched fist should have come in, Hedid not have time to do up his shoulder straps as he was toolow, only the lap strap, which was very unfortunate, In theheat of the moment he then forgot about the clenched fist,and selected undercarriage down and Oaps up for forcedlanding, This was a disastrous mistake, but understandablein the circumstances - there but for the grace of God go I.From thereon the landing was doomed, and it was a helluvaprang, the aircraft not being found for hours, The pilot, whowas a damned good one, was not killed, but he was so badlym]ured as to be on crutches for the rest of his life,

On another occasion a pilot had engine failureimmediately after take off on a mght solo He managed toland in a field with the aid of the Harvard's landing lights, butwas chastened to discover in the morning daylight that hehad Oown under telegraph wires without hitting them, totallyunaware they were there,

North American Harvard 1 N702l was one of severalearly machines delivered to the Central Flying Schoolat Upavon in the spnng of 1939. This version had thefabric covered rear fuselage, and rounded rudderwhich gave way to a more angular shape on latermodels,

(Author's collection)

Another of our chaps had an overspeeding prop ontake-off during his first solo. It made a hell of a noise ­Harvards props were normally pretty noisy anyway - withthe prop tips exceeding the speed of sound. He made itround the circuit and landed, but I think we on the groundwere more concerned due to the appalling noise beingmade,

. The smallest chap on our course had to have the seat upto Its fullest extent to be able to see out of the cockpit - theHarvard cockpit was quite roomy and deep, Aftercompleting his first solo night circuit his seat collapsed right

..e,.z_~ ; , "'--.Ii.

(Author's collection)

(Author)

Frank Mares, DFM, a Czechoslovakian Spi fire Pilotin the Second World War was training on Harvardsduring May 1940 with other Czech pilots, while

North American Harvard JIB FT179 'C' of No 2. (Indian)Group Communications Flight at Yelahanka, nearBangalore in August 1946,

the oil 0 stop It freezmg I dId thIS as a rna ter of course whenI go back to he UK, to get the full wrath of the FlightSergeant waltmg to know whIch Sl Iy bugger had done it Icould never understand why hey did 't wire the SWItch off ifthey dIdn't want it used'

One event whIch did scare me when It happened wasthe first hme I wen mght flymg m the UK CanadIan Harvardshad a long exhaust pipe which they used to tap off heat forcockpit heatmg The Bntish ones had a short stubby exhaus 'I didn't realise flames came out of the exhaus, as youcouldn't see them during the day Well you guessed It, whenI went into a cloud at night, I thought the aIrcraft was on fire, Inearly shat bricks, and it took me some while to calm down,

I remember using the precautIonary forced landingprocedure to do a bit of illegal low-level flying it'ssurprising how long it takes to find a suitable field'

While at Cottesmore, one of my mates on a solocross-country at night, picked up his girl friend on the darktaxiway flew the cross-country and then dropped her offafter landing, I would never have the nerve to do that in amillion years, I'd be too worried at getting found out orsomething going wrong, What if I was diverted to anotherairfield?

We used to do spinning on instruments, which is reallyqUIte simple I carned this over on to pIston-Provosts once Ibecame an ins ructor. When you thmk about It, spmmng isthe worst that can happen 0 you, and i does give youconfidence to know you can cope,

Squadron Leader Don Brittain also had a fairamount of Harvard experience:

The Harvard behaved like many an operational fighter,and would flick off a turn If the control mputs were notsympathetIc, While I was with 0 11 Flymg Instructors Schoolat Shullafa m the EgyptIan Canal Zone, we had 0 351(Yugoslav Parhsan) Squadron Hurncane pllots sent to us, asthey were losmg aircraf on strafmg attacks and rocketattacks, We took them up to no great altitude to show themhow tightly a turn could be pulled and no tIghter, andsupervised theIr practices, ThIS low level flymg concen­trated the mmd wonderfully

I did my B Advanced, A2 and Al Instructor Recategori­sation tests on the Harvard and spent quite a lot of timeinverted during practise, which paId off when I was laterrequired to patter an inverted spin recovery, albeit in theMagister. I thought the Harvard, although a stride from theTiger, was only a little step forward on to the operationalfighters, BritIsh or American,

I enjoyed flying the Harvard, I don't remember many vices,except that if you relaxed after landing it would quicklyground-loop on you, Our aircraft had a Verey Pistol stowageand tube, bu the pistol was never carried, We found a Cokebottle would fit in and, yes, silly and dangerous as it is now 0

me, we occasionally did drop the odd bo tie, God, howstupid I

We flew m the front for normal traimng, and m the backfor IF genuinely under the hood, as a canvas pram-likehood stowed behmd the seat came over and fastened to thecoammg, enabling you to sit there and concentra e on thedials,

One of my pals got to the end of the runway for take offwas given control, hen found there was no control column ­how's that for awarenessl

In Canada, because of the cold weather on the last trip ofthe day, you used the oil dilution switch - this put petrol in

Squadron Leader Dick Smerdon recalls of heHarvard:

terms WIth this instructor, though, which I always appreci­ated as it was a great h~lp, and he told me later on that hewas actually very amused by the incident and had given mefull marks for impudence'

This was my first mtroduction to brakes, a constant-speedpropeller and an Amencan radial engine The usage of theseItems gave me a lasting preference for hydraulic brakes incontrast to the British pneumatIcs, and an admiration for thetrouble-free radial engine no overheating, even in thetropICS (The water-cooled engine of the Spitfire m deserttraining schools suffered from overheating), The Harvardhad a lockable tailwheel, but if the wheel got to too great anangle, as in a tigh turn, on the ground, or if the weight cameoff the tail, it could equally castor freely, This taught one tocontrol the aircraft.

North American Harvard JI BD136 was one of the fewexamples of this variant to reach the United Kingdom,being used in tests at the Aeroplane and ArmamentExperimental Establishment at Boscombe Down beforebeing handed over to the USAAF at Bovmgdon mSeptember 1942.

down mto the bottomless pit, and he was unable 0 seeanythmg except the cockpit walls, but somehow managed toland successfully That caused us quite a laugh,

For slmulated instrument flying training one had to wearblue goggles and put up amber shields round the cockpitwindows, so that you were unable to see out and had to relyentirely on the illuminated instruments, What made thisdifficult, however, was the condensation inside the goggles,which blurred the appearance of the instruments, This wasvery undesirable during an instrument take-off as it was veryhard to see the Direction Indicator compass, whIch wasessential for keeping straight. We bore this with fortitude, aswe thought it bad form to blame our 'tools' when wecareered all over the place, When I told my Instructor aboutthIS forty years later, however, his reply was 'Now you tellme" They did a modification eventually, consIsting of a tubefrom the goggles to outsIde air, through a hole in the cockpitwall, which helped

One personal recollection IS of an occasIOn when I waslanding solo at night, thmkmg that I was becommg a prettyhot pilot To my chagnn I shot off the runway on to the grassFortunately the only damage was to my ego - an ace pIlotshould not do that. Mustering all my self-control I called overthe R'T, as coolly and calmly as I could, 'Clear runway',hoping nobody had notIced, or If they had they thought I hadturned off mtentlOnally Unfortunately my Ins ructor was mthe Control Tower and was not gomg to be fooled by me, Tomy surpnse his voice came over the R;T telling me in a veryforceful manner, 'Get back on to the runway and clear at thecorrect point,' which I did, with shame I was on very good

«

attached to the French AIr Force at Avord in south eastFrance, Frank and hree other pilots had taken off, andthey were flying along in formation, thinking howgrand life was, It was a very nice day, bits of cumulusabout and very good visibility, Then Frank saw awm-engined aircraft flying a few hundred feet below,

All four pilo s, being made of the right stuff andwanting to be figh er pilots, made the obvious mutualdecision - to dive down and beat the hell ou of thisFrench aircraft. At a great ra e of knots, the fourHarvards dived down (no guns or ammo, of course)and the range closed rapidly,

Frank and his fellows were in for the surprise oftheir lives when at close quarters, they espied greatblack crosses and swastikas all over this 'French'aircraft. Wha to do next? Almost instantaneously, greatdecision-making became superfluous - three para­chutes blossomed from the Dornier, which washeading south west, in the vicinity of Avord, The

German crew had baled out a the sight of these fourfearsome 'fighters' diving down,

Frank reported this incident after landing, bu dueto language difficulty the French did no seem 0

comprehend the true nature of the episode, Theircolleagues thought tha Frank and his fellow pilots

North American Harvard lIB FS753 'FBGG' of No 6Flying Training School at Ternhill in formation duringOperation Stardust in ApnJ 1950.

(Don March)

ought to have been credited wi h a quarter of a 'Jerry'each,

Squadron Lea er Mike Sparrow trained onHarvards at 3FTS Feltwell:

I found it a lovely aircraft for training, RAF versions had theundercarriage horn disconnected, but a large red light

Above:North American Harvard llB FK977 'FBTA' of No 3Flying Traimng School at Feltwellln formation dunng1951,

(vla Ray Hanna)

_I

Below:North American Harvard lIB KF292 'FBTK' of No 3Flylng Tralnlng School startlng up In the snow atFeltwellln 1951,

(Ray Hanna)

•

would come on in the cockpit if the throttle were reducedbelow one-third open and the undercarriage was up. Theexhaust flame always seemed to play onto the fuel filler capand sometimes blinded one at night. I once landed onewheels-up at night flying a very skilful circuit in order tomanipulate the throttle to keep that stupid red light out I

Cyril Smith was stationed at Thornhill in SouthernRhodesia, where Harvards were frequent visitors:

One night our flying programme was scrubbed due tothunderstorms and, with lightning flashes all over the place,something like 18 Harvards diverted in from Heany. Ofcourse they all had to be hangared for the night, and aftermuch pushing and pulling of both Ansons and Harvards inless than adequate space we managed to close all doors,then feeling very pleased with our efforts we retired to bed.Next day we received the biggest rocket ever, and suffereda humiliating lecture on the consequences of an undercar­riage collapse causing untold damage in a hangar full ofaircraft with wings and tails overlapping. Another lessonlearnt but no-one came forward with any constructive ideason how to get x-number of aircraft safely tucked away in thecircumstances. There was no second occasion perhaps theHeany pilots felt that we had no respect for their charges andwouldn't take any further risks.

Eric Sharp was posted as an Engine Fitter to one ofthe Harvard flights at Cranwell in the early fifties:

Cranwell at that time, along with many other Flying Trainingstations, was a grass airfield It had no runways, except for avestige up at one end that was built for the Gloster-Whittleprototype jet. There were no taxiways, just a little strip roadused to park the aircraft along and give access for the fuelbowser. Night flying was an experience of cold dark starrynights, navigation lights, whorling propeller discs, feeblemarshalling wands and goose-neck flare taxiway andrunway markers, pulling chock ropes and hauling trolley­accs.

I remember the Harvard with a certain affection. Groundrunning it had a bit of Biggles about it' It had a hand/electricinertia starter which wound up to a most satisfying scream,although I don't ever recall hand winding it. To get theengine started one set the throttle and pitch lever with theleft hand, then manually pumped up five pounds pressure inthe fuel line with a wobble pump on the left hand side of thecockpit, at the same time priming with the Ki-gass pump onthe right-hand side with the right hand. The inertia startswitch was in the centre of the dash behind the stick - down

to wind, up to engage. So there you are, switch on theignition. Wobble with left hand. Prime with right. Clutch stickback with thighs and nudge the inertia switch down withright foot. Wait for the starter to scream at the right pitch andnudge the switch up with the same foot The engine wouldrotate and fire, but often it would require continued effortfrom left and right hand to keep it going until sustained.

We had a lot of Ignition problems caused by water in thefront harness and plugs. 1 finally got round this by gettingadvice from my father, who worked at that time with the 2ndRoyal Tank Regiment as a civilian Engine Representative.They filled the spark plug body with silicon grease to keepthe water out. My Chiefy threw his hands up in horror at theidea, but we gave it a go and it worked'

Another ignition problem was radio interference. Wespent ages on the wing root with heads in the enginecowling, engine running, and in contact with the bod in thecockpit by long lead and head set, shaking and poking tofind the cause of crackle. The cause was finally found to bethe magneto mounting; some sort of less than perfect earthcontact between magneto and mount. This was cured by aHeath Robinson-type metal strip and bolt arrangement thatsqueezed the two together. Simple, but it took a long time tofind.

Before stopping the engine on a Harvard, the propellershould be brought to coarse pitch, to protect the bracketprop ram which was exposed in the fine pitch, but this nicetywas hardly ever observed. The mag contact breakers weredead easy to get at and set up, though quite prone to arcingand ozone corrosion. A good sniff round the mag if runningrough was experienced, was a good pointer to the problem.

The riggers were pleased with a time delay valve in thehydraulic system. This was adjusted through a panel on theport side while the engine was running. I quite enjoyed it oncold days, sitting in the closed cockpit in the warm 'bendingthe throttle', while my pal was on the outside freezing in theslipstream making touchy adjustments.

One last thing comes to mind. At the onset of lateautumn/early winter, oil dilution was carried out before theengines were shut down after the last sortie. This washed allthe gum and sludge out of the oilways. The oil filter had alsoto be dropped and cleaned, which was an onerous task. Wehad lots of Harvards, and we had to do this to all of thembefore we could pack up and go to tea. (It was years beforethe last meal of the day for any airman was called anythingbut teal) We hated the ~il dilution system.

The Harvard continued in RAF service for someyears after the war, being finally superseded byVampire T.lls in 1954/55.

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

SpecificationOne 251 hp de HaVilland Gipsy Queen 32.Span 46 [t 0 in, length 31 [t 3 in, height 12 [t 10 in,wing area 305 sq it.Empty 3,140 lb, loaded 4,100 lb.Maximum speed 150 mph at sea level, cruisingspeed 136 mph, initial climb 700 it/min, range 466mIles, endurance 3.4 hrs, service celling 15,000 it.

Don March recalls of the Prentice:

An early problem which came to light, however,was a tendency 0 flip over in a gentle turn, and this ledto the wing ips being modified by being urned up atan angle of 30 degrees. There were also problems wi hspinning, but this fault was not so eaSIly c red, onlymarginal improvemen being brought abou by fittinganti-spin s rakes forward of the tailplane and increasingthe rudder area. After only wo or hree urns themanoeuvre would develop into a flat spin from whichrecovery was difficul and ook far 00 long, especiallyif the aircraft had insufficient height 0 star with.Various tail configura ions were tried, including at onestage twin fins and rudders, but eventually thedesigners arrived at a compromise shape.

Deliveries commenced in 1947, and over 350 wereproduced for the RAF, 125 of these under sub-contractby Blackburn. Many more were exported to Argentina,Lebanon and India, and the type was also built underlicence at Bangalore by Hindustan Aircraft for the RoyalIndian Air Force. Despite heir wartime design andmanufac uring experience with the Proctor, however,problems were encountered by the makers, givingrise to cri icism which later endangered their pros-ec s for the next genera ion of rainers. However, he

Pren i e served or some years wi h he Cen ral FlyingSchool. the RAF College, Cranwell and several FlyingTraming Schools. I became one of the many trainerswhich over he years have become referred to as he'clockwork mouse'. It was la er used a Swan on Morleyfor raining air signallers. The Prentice was wi hdrawnfrom pilo training in 1953, when it was superseded byhe Provost, and large numbers were sold for civil use,though it was not he success in this role hat had beenenvisaged, and many remained unconverted.

Squadron Leader Mike Sparrow flew the Pren iceat 3 FTS Feltwell:

If held in spin this aircraft became very stable, hencedifficult to get out of the spin again. This led to severalaccidents some were fatal, some people walked away. Itwas pleasant to fly straight and level, but a cow when doingaerobatics. A good slow roll seemed almost impossible,probably due to the stability imposed by the upturned wingtips.

As an ab InItiO pilot I looked at It, though 1 looke a htUeantiquated, and had a shght twmge of sadness hat I wouldno be flymg he TIger oth However, bemg so keen inthose days, I dIsmissed that hought rom my mmd and wasdetermmed to like the aIrcraft. WhICh I succeeded in doingvery qUIckly

The Pren ice had a number of advantages over theTIger The instructor sat at your SIde, not behmd, which wassupposed to make for be ter instruction The TIger was moreseat-of-pants type of flying, whIch was not a bad thing initself, but i was also very necessary to become proficie t oninstruments, for which the Prentice was ideal, wIth its far

(Author)

Below:Percival Prentice VN691 '52', a pre-production ma­ChIne later used by No 7 Reserve FlyIng School andseen here at Leicester East In June 1953.

Above:Percival Prentice VR2lB, a pre-production machineused by Blackbums prior to bUildIng these machInesunder sub-contract. Note the distInctive wIngtips.

(Author's collection)

Towards the end of 1943, Air Minis ry Specifi­ca ion T.23,43 was issued for a new basic trainerto replace he TIger Moth, which was by

then becommg outda ed, being a simple low-powereddesIgn fi ted with few instr men s, and largelydependent on good weather. What was now requiredwas an economical. all-weather monoplane, fullyeqUlpped wIth modern ins ruments and capable ofprovldmg the pupil with a much greater range ofexperience. Tenders were received from several firmsincluding iles, Percival. de Havilland and Heston.Percival and de Havilland were asked to construct fiveprototypes each of their respective designs, for testingpurposes, but the de Havilland order was soondropped leaving the field clear for Percival.

The first prototype machine, which adopted thename Prentice, flew on 31 March 1946, and was toprovide the basic flying tuition for the early post-warinflux of pilots. Its de Havilland Gipsy Queen enginedelivered twice the power of the engine used in theTiger Moth, and was fitted with a variable pitchairscrew. Its sturdy airframe was much larger than itspredecessor and was of metal construction, except forthe con rol surfaces, but retained he fixed undercar­nage configura ion. The forward fuselage was nearlyrectangular in cross-section, and was of ligh -alloyshee ing covering a semi-braced s rue reo Thisblended moan a er section of a tall elliptical shape ofsemi-monocoque constructIOn wIth light-alloy framesand s ringers.

The large, fully enclosed cabin incorporated VHFradIO, electrical in ercommunica ions and SBA blind­flying eqUlpment with two-stage amber screens. It alsohad heatmg and ventilation. There was an excellentfield of view from both front seats, and the standard ofroominess and comfort was high, in stark contrast 0 itsTiger Moth predecessor. The intention of the third seatwas to economise on instruction by having a secondpupil seated behind the instructor and pupil in the frontseats, looking over their shoulders, so as to gain someair experience and enable him to listen to theinstructor's commentary on the electrical intercommu­nications system In practise the idea proved unsa is­factory. The aircraft was underpowered for thispurpose, and tended to waddle through he air,consequen ly it was largely used as a side-by-sidetwo-sea er.

Taxlmg proved to be no problem, the all-roundvIew combining with a well-sprung fixed undercar­riage and pneuma ic brakes which could be operatedsmoothly. The aircraft became airborne easily, andwhen in flight proved suf icien ly sensitive on thecontrols. There was plenty of vibration warning of astall, and recovery from a spin was not difficult. Bothpowered and glide landings could be made at about 75mph, the steep angle of approach giving an excellentview of the landing path.

• ) i ~..•;., : • '1); .

superior mstrumentation and well-designed instrumentpanel

Open cockpit flying is very nice if the weather is fine,but the Prentice had the advantage of an enclosed cockpit,protected from all winds and weather. However, it had itsdisadvantages. It was underpowered, which was not verygood for aerobatics, and gave it a slow rate of climb. It wasvery difficult, if not impossible, to do a decent half roll off thetop of a loop.

The Prentice was designed for three pilots, the one inthe rear seat being supposed to learn by observing, but thiswas not very successful. There was too much weight with athird pilot, and a consequent risk of getting into a flat spinfrom which one might not be able to recover. The three pilotconcept was therefore abandoned.

Robin Brown was a pupil on Prentices at 22 FTSSyerston in May 1951:

I found the Prentice a pleasant aircraft to fly. It was a tinymachine You sat side by side with your instructor, so hecould watch you handling the controls. There was, as far as Irecall, never a third person behind us. It always struck me asbeing a curious aircraft, first because of those turned-upwing tips, and then because of the platform Just forward ofthe fin and rudder which had some effect on the spinningcharacteristics. I thought that any aircraft which neededcomic little additions and attachments like that must havestarted life inherently unstable. Anyway, whatever vices itmay have had to start with must have been eliminated, sinceit was a delight to fly.

By the time I moved on to Harvards I had done 50 hoursin the Prentice, but it remains 'special' because I flew my firstsolo in it after 7 hours 50 minutes dual, about average on thecourse, and that great day always remains indelibly fixed inevery pilot's mind. I did mine just down the Fosse Way onthe grass airfield at RAF Newton, which is where first soloswere always flown by Syerston pupils - probably because it

Percival Prentice T 1 VR267 'FDIO' of the CentralFlying School at Little Rlssington, seen at an air show in1951.

(MAP photo)

was a quieter place with not so much going on in the circuitto distract the nervous. Your instructor simply unstrapped,got out, gave you a thumbs up and then went and hid behindthe control tower, hardly daring to watch. You took off, didone circuit and one landing, taxied over and collected himand then flew back to base.

This was the time of the Korean war and there was a bigRAF expansion programme. Lots of young men were beingpushed through wings courses. I'm not so sure that theinstruction was all that brilliant or as thorough as it mighthave been. In the early 1950s you were left to get on with itvery much by yourself and it was assumed that you knewwhat to do and that you would do the sensible thing - ofcourse in those days you could put an aircraft down almostanywhere and get away with it - but if you had never flownbefore you would not always know what the sensible thingwas.

I remember having a final handling check with thePrentice Squadron Commander, Sqn Ldr Wilson, and wewere somewhere near Grantham, when the squadron leadersaid, 'All right, set course for home. Show me your map andwork out the course to get to Syerston'. Well, in fact youcould almost see Syerston, and I knew the countryside likethe back of my hand because I had lived there and hadrelations all round Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire. It hadnever crossed my mind I needed a mapl I said, 'Well Ihaven't gone one,' at which point Wilson nearly failed me.After that, of course, I never flew without a map, but it was soridiculous that I could have reached the 50-hour stagewithout any instructor even bothering to tell me that vitalfact.

One amusing thing that happened to me during my Basic

--

Training stage on Prentices was when I was flying with mymstructor, Flt Lt Lines, a quiet capable man who I liked. Wewere in the Ossington Low Flying Area, north-west ofSyerston, where we practised dead-stick landings andhedge-hopping. With piston-engined aircraft you always hadto rev up during a practice forced-landing, about everyhundred feet of descent, to be sure the engine wouldrespond when you wctnted to overshoot. We came quite lowand Flt Lt Lines said 'I have control' at Just about the lastpossible moment. As he opened up, of course, the inevitablehappened, the engine didn't respond. We sank lower andlower into the standing corn when, at last, the engine came tolife and staggered off into the air again. Nothing was said, helooked one way and I looked the other, both pretendingnothmg had occurred. It takes something like that to happento your instructor to make you realise he is human after alland not mfallible l We got back to Syerston and peoplewalkmg thlS way and that in front of the line huts began tostop and stare at us. We got out of the aircraft and realisedwhy - the undercarriage spats were festooned with sheavesof corn l

. Another event that happened in the Ossington LowFlymg Area concerned a pupil who actually did have enginefallure. He coped very well an ended up just inside a verysmall field. They sent an instructor in another aircraft to pickhim up, and when he arrived overhead he saw the strandedmachine, and decided to land alongside, making the notunreasonable assumption that if a pupil pilot could landthere, a trained instructor could. Instead, he shot through thefence on the far side of the field and ended up on his nose.

Percival Prentice T1 VS270 'FAFj' of the RAF Collegeat Cranwell around 1949.

(MAP photo)

When the pupil finally got back to base he was asked how hehad managed to land in such a small space. 'Oh,' he said, 'Itouched down two fields away I bounced into that one l '

Nowadays either of those two incidents would mean aBoard of Inquiry and a possible Court Martial, but in thosedays it was all part of the wonderful delight of flying,something to be laughed about in the bar that night, a lessonto be learned. Thus you were expected to get on with it andcope as best you could. It is sad that today's jet pilotsprobably know nothing about the sheer amusement anddelight that has long since gone out of flying dating fromthe time the new attitudes began to creep in during the latefifties and sixties, but there was an elan, a 'press on' spiritthat was a requirement if you wanted to get your wings andreach a squadron.

One morning I was told to go and bring up an aircraftfrom the squadron hangar for the first trip of the day. Thiswas a task that was sprung on you after you had done a fewhours flying, and it involved starting a Prentice from 'cold'.Up until that day you had always done it with the help of yourinstructor - this time you were on your own; not only that butyou had a crowd of airmen watching you. I suddenly thought,'Oh, my God, do I really know how to start the damn thing'.One couldn't appeal for help from the groundcrew, thatwould be an admission of failure, you just had to get it rightall by yourself l Also, like a car on a cold morning, you had toget the fuel mixture correct or you would flood thecylinders. Meanwhile, up on the flight line people would bewaiting for you, anxious to start the day's flying I I think thedesperation of that morning etched itself into my dreams fora long time afterwards.

In fact the Prentice was normally very easy to start. Itwas in the Harvard where you had to build up the pressurein the carburettor by pushing and pulling at a priming pump.Some later aircraft were started by a small cartridge, others

) ! ~_.lf. •had to have the propeller swung, but most machInes In thosedays needed a 'trolley-acc.' The trolley accumulator was alittle trailer full of batteries on two solid metal wheels thatwas plugged in somewhere by a long umbilical cord andwhich gave you electrIcal power to start the aircraft withouthaving to rely on the internal batteries. You could start oninternals if you had landed away somewhere, but only inemergencies. As soon as the aircraft was running you wavedaway the trolley-acc. There were special rooms in thehangars where the trolley-accs were recharged, identifiableby a low humming noise that emanated from them.

One thing I disliked was having to fly the SBA (StandardBeam Approach) instrument let-down system You had whatwere known as the 'two-stage amber' screens which, if youwere down for an SBA sortie, you took along in the cockpit.When you were ready to start, you slotted these into theinside of the glass panels either side of the cockpit. The frontwindscreen remained clear, but to stop you peeping out youwore a special amber visor which, together with the sidepanels quite blacked out your view of the outside world. Youlet your seat down so you couldn't see over the coaming butonly the instrument panel in front of you. It was Just likeflying at night.

The system was designed to make you concentrateentIrely on your instruments As far as I remember, youwere set up in a downwInd pattern and you had to make aprocedural (Rate I) turn to bring yourself round onto theouter marker beacon which was sltuated somewhere nearNewton (I think you could only use SBA on one runwayheading). In your earphones you started to pick up thesignals, dots or dashes dependIng whether you were port orstarboard of the required track, plus an occasional identsignal so you didn't home in on the wrong aIrfield. When youwere bang on the centre line you got a steady note. Over theouter marker you started descending at a fixed rate and youshould have been at. say, 500 feet over the inner marker.The object of the exercise was to bring you down to a certainheight over the runway threshold about 50 feet, from whIchpoint you could look up and make a normal visual landing.The SBA system was quite hard to fly, lots of perspiration andanguish, anyway for me.

Percival Prentice T 1 VR236 'FAEA' and other aircraftof the RAF College at Cranwell in 1951.

(Eric Sharp)

Percival Prentice T 1 VR230 'PERC of No 3 FlyingTraining School at Feltwell, seen at an air show in 1950

(MAP photo)

In those days (something of a cliche?) spinning wastaught as quite a normal manoeuvre. I believe it is no longertaught unless you are a test pilot or something exalted, but inPrentices you were expected to be able to spin, and,naturally enough, recover. You went up to a generous heightabove ground level, about 10,000 feet, and you had torecover by about 5,000 feet, so you probably did four or fiveturns. There was no difficulty with the Prentice, what with allthe gadgets stuck all over it. I felt sure, though, that whoeverhad tried to spin the Prentice in its prototype stage musthave tent-pegged into the ground resulting in a concertedrush by the designers back to the drawing board l Allthrough my flying career I tried to make a point of neverflying an aircraft that had not been in RAF service for at leasta while so as to ensure that most of the bugs had been ironedout of it l

Squadron Leader Stan Greenhaw flew Prenticeswith 3 FTS' at Feltwell:

I well remember the Sunday morning in August 1948 when

the first aircraft of that name flew into Feltwell. I was theStation Duty Officer over that weekend, and it was my duty tomeet all incoming aircraft as well as 'see-off' departing onesWhen the Prentice taxied into the hardstanding, I was a bitappalled at its slab sides, enormous canopy, general lack ofaerodynamic beauty and the feeling it gave of being veryunderpowered.

The CFI flew the aircraft that morning, and after he hadlanded I had a go, when all my suspicions were provedcorrect. On grass it was very underpowered, and I got theimpression of a slow acceleration as we charged towards thefar end of the take-off grass runway. It lumbered into the air,but was very stable and solid once airborne and doingcircuits and landings, medium turns and stalls. Aerobaticswere awful, however. Of course it looped OK, but for traineepilots, slow and barrel rolls were only just possible andtended to be a bit disastrous. It flew like an airbornecaravan, and landings were very positive with no tendencyto bounce.

As a trainer it lacked 'feel' unlike the other two traineraircraft I was Instructing on at that time, the Tiger Moth andHarvard. It was useful, though, in some flying exercises fornight familiarisation, navigation exercises, and introductionto instrument flying and beam approach, because it had athird seat, and the 'non-piloting' student who occupied thisseat could get useful experience in the exercises withoutactually flying the aircraft. The changeover of students

•

involved a bIt of chmbing about inside the canopy, but wasquick and relatively easy. One had to match the studentsinvolved, otherwise inflated and deflated egoes could resultif the 'piloting' student made a rubbish of an exercisevirtually under the eyes of his partner the 'observing'student in the third seat

The extra seat was very useful when a st ff pilot or otherserviceman was being posted, and would easily accommo­date luggage, fishing rods and guns, and even a smallbicycle on occasion. I last flew he aircraft at Feltwell inJanuary 1949, but flew it spasmodically over the next fewmonths at CFS with trainee QFls. The students were allmature pilots, and most of them thought the Prentice wassome sort of bad joke.

A groundcrew viewpoint is provided by EricSharp, who worked on Prentices for a time with HQflight at Cranwell in 1951:

The flight operated four Prentices, two Ansons and a TigerMoth in the communicatlOns and general duties role for

flying hour currency for some of the desk bound members ofthe staff

The Prentice was a nice docile aeroplane which we usedas a primary navigation tr iner, the trainee sitting in the rearcockpit behind the dual side-by-side pilot seats. Betweenthem was a whole host of radio and navigation equipment,consequently the plane was very underpowered with threeup. The version of the Gipsy Queen fitted didn't seem 0

have half the poke of. say, that in the Devon. I remembercadging a lift with another lad to anston one weekend, witha pilot who was going home for a couple of days staff usinghe aIrcraft as personal transport was quite normal atweekends' We trundled off, the pilot being quite perplexedat needing the whole length of Cranwell South airfield to getin the aIr. What he didn't know was that as well as twopassengers, the kit bag in the back had my motor bikeengine in it l

[}={]~[FU11D[FU~ [P®[j©DW@~

[p [j(Q)W(Q)~11

In July 1948 an Air Staff Operational Requirement(OR.257) was formulated for a new type ofsingle-engined two-seater basic trainer with

a fixed undercarriage and side-by-side seating in an

enclosed cabin. I was initially intended for useworldwide, and therefore its construction would haveto be sufficiently sturdy to be able to withstand longperiods of exposure to all types of weather conditions.

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

SpecificationOne 550 hp AJvjs Leonides 126.Span 35 it 2 in, length 28 ft 8 in, height 12 ft 21/2 in,wing area 214 sq ft.Empty 3,350 lb, loaded 4,400 lb.Maximum speed 200 mph at sea level, cruisingspeed 162 mph, initial climb 2,200 ft/min, range 648miles, endurance 4 hrs, service ceJ1ing 25,000 ft.

....--.~ ;if p

(Paddy Porter collection)

Speed was no seen as 00 importan a factor, bu I

would have to be capable of maintaining a continuouscruising speed of not less than 110 kno s. More crucialwas is endurance, which was envisaged to be at leasttwo hours, and somewhat more than this if it could beachieved without any detriment to performance.

The machine needed to be simple to fly. I wouldhave to be highly manoeuvrable and f lly aerobatic,yet a he same ime free from vices or anypeculiarities, the mas ering of which migh inculca ebad habits in he trainee pilo s or call for specialhandling echniques. I was essential tha adequa ewarning be given by he machine when i wasapproaching a stalled condition, either by elevatorbuffeting or judder. It would also be necessary for thedesign to allow a pupil to recover quickly and withoutmuch difficul y from any stage of a stall, spin or otherunusual condition.

Percival Provost second pro 0 ype WE530, fitted with aCheetah engine.

It was specified that the cockpit location and designhad to provide the best possible all round view forinstruction and pupil, both in the air and on the ground.The instrument layout was to be as simple as possible,wi has andard blind flying panel loca ed on he porside in fron of the lef -hand seat, which was to be usedby the pupil. Immedia ely 0 he right of his panel wereo be he en ine instrumen s. The ins ruc or,n theright-hand seat, was 0 be provided with an air speed

indicator an al ime er, and a turn and bank Indica or.The engine would have 0 be a tough design i it

was 0 survIve the emanding conditions likely to beencountered in training in all kinds of climatics. Enginecooling arrangements would have to be such that itcould run continuously at low altitudes and for len thyperiods of circuits and bumps wi hout undue risk ofsuffering any damage. I mus also be fully capable ofcoping wi h long periods ofaxiing and wai ing on theground.

Of pnmary importan e were ease of maintenanceand servicing, WIth trouble-free opera Ion. The designhad to be simple in such respec s. as it was highlylikely in hose early pos -war days that a goodproportion of the routine servicing would have 0 becarried out by semi-skilled personnel.

The requirement was developed and refined,eventually emerging in September 1948 as official

speci ica ion T.16j48. Consideration was given to thefirms likely to have he design capabi i y for such amachine, and it was proposed at that stage thatinvitations 0 tender be sen ou to Airspee ,Blackburn, Boulton Paul, Genera Aircraf, PercivaLScot ish Aviation and Westland. De Havillands werealso thought capable, but they were not included in thisinitial list as their design staff was considered to bealready fully occupied with their DH.l11 design, anin ended three-engined tandem-wing development ofhe Vampire, though in he event this was later

abandoned.Meanwhile Percivals, one 0 those to whom

invi ations were to go, had anticipated events.Following heir experience with he Pren ice, they had

seen he need or a more advanced design of ab initiorainer, and already embarked on a private ven ure

design, designated the P.56. A mock-up had beenconstructed, and in fac on 20 October 1948 they hadwritten to the Ministry of Supply proposing that one oftheir officials come to look at this, and also make a flightin their new Prince, which was then undergoing tests.

By the time invitations went out on 15 December,the list had been modified, and enders were nowsough from Boulton Paul, de Havilland, Handley Page(Reading), Percival and Westland. Hand ey Page(Reading) was a subsidiary of that firm, which hadbought up the Miles company at Woodley. Probablymore out of courtesy than real in erest, copies of hespecification were sent to a number of 0 her firms,although even at that stage i was apparent that theywere unlikely to receive much consideration. It wasseen by the trade however, as a crucial contract, andtenders were received from no less than 15 firms,namely Air Service Training, Airtech, Auster,Blackburn and General, Boul on Paul, Chrislea, Ellio sof ewbury, Fairey, Folland, Handley Page (Reading),PercivaL Planet, Portsmou h Aviation, A.V. Roe andWes land. The Avro s bmission was of in erest in that iwould have saved design ime by utilising Anson wings

Percival Provost WG503, the Leonides-engined proto­type, initially flown with the manufacturers markingG-23-J.

(Hunting photo)

and an Athena tail.An evaluation in April 1949 indicated that Perci­

vals, hanks mainly to their private ven ure designwork, were he only firm who could produce aprototype a a sufficiently early da e or he project 0be kep on schedule. Ideally, at leas six months estflying was needed before placing a produc ion order,if delivery of the firs machine off he line was to meethe Air S aff requiremen targe date of mid-I952. It waspossible that Handley Page (Reading) and Avros mightalso be able to meet that target, but this could only beachieved by placing a production order at the sametime as that for the prototypes, a risk which was noteasy 0 Justify.

Despite the head s art, some reservations wereexpressed about giving the contract 0 Percival. Thesecen red round he difficul ies they had previouslyencoun ered with the Pren ice. They were consideredo have been too weak aerodynamically, and also

(Author)

Below:Percival Provost T 1 WV534 'MM' of No 22 FlyingTraining School at Syerston in July 1954.

.111Jl •~-.I'.

(RAF Museum Photo)

....

AbovePercival Provost T 1 XF685 '20' of the Empire Test PJjotsSchool at Farnborough in 1957.

the P.56 in February 1950 and the HPR.2, as the otherdesign had become, two months later. Tests of eachhad taken place at the Aeroplane and ArmamentExperimental Establishment, Boscombe Down, and theP.56 was markedly superior. Its handling trials wereexcellent, the design requiremen s were fully met, andno major critcisms had been made by the test pilots.The Handley Page design proved much less sa isfac­tory, the trials revealing that it lacked the basichandling qualities essen ial in this class of trainingaircraft, and several months of redesign work wouldbe necessary to make it acceptable. evertheless, oneof each machine was sent to No. 3 Flying TrainingSchool at Feltwell for comparative trials.

Just before Christmas 1950, Percivals soughtau hority to fit a modified fin with dorsal and ruddermass balance, etc. The Handley Page design was bynow in deep trouble, however, and the third machinehad already been cancelled. The view from the rearquarter was poor. Care had to be taken 0 avoid theaircraft nosing over when the brakes were applied,particularly when solo. It had a marked tendency forself-stalling when the flaps were down and the poweron, consequently requiring a good measure of speedwhen approaching to land. Even worse, deficiencies inthe spinning characteristics were such that thismanoeuvre was by then prohibited until fur her order.Fi ing WE496, he first proto ype, with a modified finand rudder, which increased he rudder area, broughtsome improvement, but he results were still notacceptable.

The Handley-Page HPR-2, one of the main competitorsfor the Specification T 16/48 contract.

/

inexpenenced on the design details tha are necessaryin order to make a sufficiently robust aircraft. Similarconsiderations virtually automatically ruled out mest ofthe firms tendering to T.16/48.

Avro, not surprisingly in view of their history,were seen as being the best in experience, but theirdesign team was already stretched with current work.Percivals, on the other hand, had the benefit of aprivate venture design which was well advanced, andhad also taken to heart the lessons resul ing from theirearlier shortcomings, considerably strengthening theirdesign staff. It was felt that the best course would be totake advantage of his and place an order withPercivals but, as a precaution, also order prototypesfrom one of the more experienced firms. Accordinglyorders were placed on 21 July 1949 for threeprototypes each from Percival and Handley Page.

The engine selected for the T.16/48 was theArmstrong-Siddeley Cheetah 17, in preference to thede Havilland Gipsy Queen 71 which had also beenconsidered. The Air Staff remained adamant on thispoint, even hough the new Alvis Leonides enginewould also be available. They took the view thatalthough the latter was a more modern design, theCheetah had the advantage of reliability, it had a longlife between overhauls, and spares for it were readilyavailable.

At a progress meeting in July 1950, however, theLeonides option was again raised, and it was thendecided that the second prototype of each designwould now have this fitted. It was stressed at thismeeting that the winner of the competition would haveto be produced at the earliest possible date, the designbeing ini ially required at that ime for replacement ofageing Tiger Moths with the RAF in Sou hem Rhodesia.

Meanwhile prototypes of bo h machines had flown,

.·..t-·it lr ~"..'., :Time was by now pressing, and a final meeting at

the end of January came to what by then was virtually aforegone conclusion. From an engineering viewpoint,the designs were considered to have equal merit. Itwas decided, however, that the P.56 had far superiorflying qualities, irrespective of their respectivespinning characteristics. The Handley Page designwould, in any event, be more expensive to produce.The Ministry of Supply therefore recommended thePercival design to the Air Ministry, the name Provostbeing later adopted.

An initial order for 200 Leonides-engined ma­chines was placed in May 1951, and WV418, the firstmachine off the line, was ready by 31 January 1953,only about six months behind the target date set by theAir Staff, though by then the RAF no longer needed anyfor use in Southern Rhodesia. The first few machineswere reserved for trials purposes of various kinds, buton 28 May WV432 was delivered to the Central FlyingSchool at Little Rissington, and the Provost thus becamethe last piston-engined basic training aircraft to enterunit service with the RAF. .

Its introduction enabled the RAF to bring in a newProvostfVampire training scheme to supersede thePrentice/Harvard system, which was no longer appro­priate for pilots going to jet-equipped squadrons. As aconsequence the schools were gradually regrouped,some being equipped entirely with Provosts and somewith only Vampires.

As production continued, deliveries were made toNo. 6 Flying Training School at Ternhill, commencingwith WV426 on 1 July, being followed by 22 FTS atSyerston which received its first four machines,WV501-504, all on 19 November, building up within sixmonths to a strength of 50. Subsequent deliveries weremade from a second order for 55 aircraft, with 3 FTS atFeltwell getting its first aircraft on 23 September,followed by the RAF College at Cranwell on 19October. Two final orders were placed, for 16 and 66aircraft respectively, but the only other unit to receivethe Provost in quantity was 2 FTS at Hullavington in May1954, although a number were delivered in 1958 toboth the Central avigation and Control School atShawbury and the RAF Flying College at Manby. Smallnumbers were flown by various other units, includingseveral University Air Squadrons.

Anumber of Provosts went overseas. An unarmedversion was designated the T.51, armed conversions ofthe T.l were called T.52s, whilst new builds of armedaircraft were T.53s. Overseas orders went to Burma,Eire, Iraq, Malaya, Southern Rhodesia and Sudan.

In service, the Provost had the advantage over thePrentice of much higher performance. It was particu­larly fine in aerobatics, with excellent manoeuvrabilityand a rate of roll exceeding 90 degrees per second.Adjustable amber screens were fitted for simulatingblind flying instruction.

Squadron Leader Don Brittain flew Provosts manytimes:

While in Malaya I was flying in a Provost with a big IndianSikh who messed up a landing. He had partial power on, notenough to climb away but too much to stay down he forgotall his English and wouldn't respond when I tried to takecontrol. The control tower was getting close, and as he hadfrozen in the controls there was little I could do. So I hit himto make him let go, and I just cleared the tower. Had it notbeen side-by-side I would have been dead. I

I found the piston-Provost a very good trainer. On a trialI once flew one up to its absolute ceiling of 21,500 feet, fittedwith oxygen of course, to see if it would be worthwhile fittingoxygen generally '30 as to get above the weather it wasn'tand none was fitted

A colleague of mine, while doing circuits at ChetwyndRelief Landing Ground, had a very heavy landing he tookcontrol and asked the student if there was any sign ofdamage. 'Wing's a bit wrinkled,' came the reply. Aftellanding and shutdown, he walked around to have a look. Themain spar had sheared - the wing had moved up about oneinch and was only being held on by the skin'

Another time we learnt a student had got an enginefailure and was about to force land. aturally, being ghouls,we ran out just in time to see him apply 90 degrees of banknear the ground to change to another runway. The aircraftstalled, flicked and crashed wings level - the undercarriagebroke off, as did the wings which went up and clapped overthe cockpit. As they started to fall to earth the pilot was outand running. Afterwards he said he was worried about beingburnt alive as he was trapped in the cockpit and couldn't getout. He wouldn't believe us that he was actually out andrunning before the wings had hit the ground'

Another instructor friend did a heavy landing at SouthCerney, and as he overshot was surprised to see a tyre rollaway from him it was his own which had broken off Yes, incase you are wondering - he did manage a successful onewheel landing.

I once had a student who on an IF [instrument] take-off,just after applying full power, applied full right rudder. Iimmediately took control, but not until I'd left the runway andgone around the control caravan God knows what wentthrough the controller's mind. On the next IF trip I was readyfor him, and, yes, he start~d to do it again, but my size 9 bootprevented it. Why did he do it? He didn't know perhaps adeath wish.

When I was in the CFS course, I had finished the sortiesbut hadn't enough hours, so I was sent off with anothertrainee instructor to fly for 11/2 hours to get a tick on theboard. Where shall we go? I know, let's go down to SalisburyPlain to look at the badge carvings there good idea. Off wewent, lovely day, when suddenly flak-like smoke puffsappeared. What's that, I asked don't know, came theanswer - well never mind, nice sight seeing the badges.Let's go home - those funny smoke puffs again. It wasn't until

Facing pagePercival Provost T 1 XF836 jG' of the RAF College,CranwelJ.

(MAP photo)

eleven years later, when instructing at Syerston, that I foundout what the smoke puffs were a warning that you were in adanger area clear off sharp. Happy daysl

Another pilot to train on Provosts was ChrisAshworth:

My first contact with the piston-engine Provost was at SouthCerney in January 1955. I was at the RAF's Central FlyingSchool (Basic) on the first stage of learning to become aflying instructor.

Pemval Provost T 1 visiting a strangely deserted HMSHeron.

(Brian Lowe)

First impressions were of an aircraft of workmanlikeappearance, neat and compact despite its side-by-sideseating. Parked on the grass outside the flight hut it lookedready and eager, and so it proved for I had no reason torevise my initial reaction during the following weeks.

The Leonides engine started easily following thecharacteristic 'crack' of the cartridge starter, and the aircraft

• Sir t

handled well on the ground always a good start. In the aIrhe controls were well co-ordinated a d crisp and there wasplenty of power. The aircraft had good stalling character­istics, was stable enough for accurate mstrument flying andyet capable of precise aerobatics and circuit flying - all'plus' points in a basic trainer.

Of course the Provost did have faults. The position of theoil cooler shutter had to be watched carefully to maintaintemperatures in limits, the spinning characteristics wererather erratic and, perhaps worst of all, fuel fumes in thecockpi were a problem dunng and after aerobatics, makmgmany ab milia students feel very sick with consequen lossof i erest l

Overall, the Provost was a delight to fly, a first-classtrainer in nearly all respects. I was difficult to believe that itwas from the same stable as the Prentice'

Robin Brown flew Provosts on a CFS course late inhis career

I flew the Provost in Augus and September 1957, when Icame back from RAF Germany I was posted to the CentralFlying School at Little Rissmgton, and flew somethin over100 hours on Provosts Once again these had side-by-sideseating like the Prenllce

The only really frightenIng thng that happened to meduring this time was when I was sent off solo one day to dospinning and aerobatics. I was upside down with negative-gwhen suddenly the parachute which was in the unoccupiedright-h nd (instructor's) seat floated up and started driftingaround the cockpit. This was a very dicey situation because,first of all, you have to recover from the manoeuvre and,secondly, you have to grab he parachute and make sure itdoesn' do somet ing stupid like sailing out of the window,or worse, Jam the controls (whIch was a very real possibility)and, thirdly, you have got to get it back mto the bucket part

of the seat whence 1 came. It was qUIte a dangerous fewminutes, and I was very cross wIth myself for being so idle asnot to have done my pre-flight checks properly.

When the aircraft was due to fly solo it was important toensure that the harness in the unoccupied seat wasconnected and the straps pulled tight. If I had done this thelap straps would have prevented the parachute from goingwalkies by i self.

The Provos was a splendid lit Ie aircraft, with a nicewide undercarriage and he bIg radial engine that remindedme of the Fw 190. I liked it. My opinion of its potentialitieswent up when, af er I had finIshed at CFS, I was posted to theFIymg College at Manby and Isaw in the hangar one day twoProvosts being modified to go to a Middle Eastern country,having been transformed into very nice operational groundattack aircraft, by the addition of camouflage, machine gunsin the wings, bomb racks, extra fuel and so on

Robin goes on to give a fascinating insight in to hisattitude to the CFS at that time:

There were two alternatives once you got your wings. Youeither went straight to the Central Flying School (evenbefore domg jet converslOn), in whIch case you werefunnelled Into the CFS empire and became branded as a QFI(QualIfied Flying I structor) for the rest of your lIfe, or youwent to a squadron, and became what I regarded as anormal pilot. Eventually, though, the CFS got you, but thismight not be until you had done several tours on varioustypes of aircraft, as in my case I think it's correct to say that

Percival Provost Tl XF541 'PC' ofNo 6Flying TrainingSchool at Ternhill.

(MAP photo)

Cockpit of Percival Provost T 1 'PF' of the CentralFlylng School at Little Risslngton In 1957.

(Robln Brown)

your career prospects were somewhat affected if you hadnever been to the CFS.

I was posted back to UK after having spent five or SiXvery happy years in Germany boring holes in the sky, and Iwas sent to Little RissIngton for the CFS instructor's course.However, I didn't get on with hem very well. It was not whatI wanted 0 do at all I had always hough that FI's were anodd lot, not quite as other folk, so to speak l Even if youmanaged to escape from the dreaded Flying TrainingCommand and got back on a squadron you were alwaysstuck with the QFI label and given the job of instrumentflying rating - half your flying would be on two-seaters, Idecided it wasn't for me,

As a trainee instructor one returned to basics. You wentback into the classroom a CFS and relearned in far greaterdetail everything you had done on your 'wings' course IImagine that CFS had the task of not only teachmg you toteach, but also remedying the gaps in your knowledge thatcame from the rather elementary tuition at Flying TrammgSchools m the early fifties, This was caused by so manypilots being pushed through at the tlme of the Korean War.Although I'm glad I qualified that way I don't think I wouldhave been bright enough to succeed had I gone throughCranwell (I was/am hopeless at maths for a start),

So, when you went back to CFS you were really beingput through the mill again, and being groomed for a farhigher standard, It was like going back 0 school for he thirdtime, It bored me to a certain extent, although I wasfascinated by the lessons of flyIng instructional technIques

Moreover I wasn't very impressed by the at itudes atCFS I was sad that I failed the course, but glad in cer ain

respects, even though it was the first tlme I had falled a flymgcourse. The course was in two parts First you had twomonths basic training flying piston Provosts, and then youwere given instruction on various other types of aircraft.Finally you concentrated on the machine on which you wouldbe instructing, either basic or advanced, whatever CFSthought you best fitted for

After passIng out at CFS, you would probably be sent toan FTS, and after a couple of tours you mlght manage to getback on a squadron If you were a bnlhant pupil you mIghtend up Instructmg at CFS

Here I think I ought to admIt that my atlltude to CFS ISperhaps curious, but also natural IadmIred a lot tfiat went onat CFS, and I appreciated that the instructors were probablythe best in the world, but, having failed the course, 1tend tobe critical and even laugh at CFS's attitudes. CFS had, and Isuppose still has, tremendous kudos. It was obviously a showplace, the station was immaculate. Students came from allover the world, parllcularly the 'emergmg' natlOns whowere bullding their brand new air forces from scratch Aswell as beIng rather a bInd It was, in a way, qUIte an honourto be chosen to go to CFS (not everyone even got that far)

The instructional blocks where, for mstance, you learntabout aero engmes, were splendid, big demonstrallonrooms where beautifully sectioned engmes were on dIsplay.The mstructors here were COs, and they, too had beenchosen for their knowledge and instructional skills. Lectureswere always supported by films, colour slides, or whatever'aid to instruction' was necessary.

It was a very efficiently run place, but for variousreasons I didn't like it - it was not my cup of tea It wassomething to do with the attitudes of the Instructors, whoseemed to thInk they were God's Gif to the AIr Force Whenyou came back from an operatlOnal command like 2nd TAFwhere you didn't do thmgs 'by the book', the nIgglmgattentlOn to detail was irrita mg It was a standIng Joke in

•

[E) CQ)~ ~~CQ) ITlJ

[P)@~~ [E)@~~DCQ)~

Germany that the only take-off checks you needed were 'fueland noise', you checked you had some fuel and if there wassome noise from the engines you were all right I You went offand did hairy things in those days. On 79 Squadron youlow-flew whenever you wanted, the lower the better Onedid extraordinary scramble take-offs, or cobbled togetherhuge 'Balbos' of aircraft, twenty or thirty from differentsquadrons and wings, to go and stir up the Americans for afabulous dog fight I Things that would turn people's hairwhite these days, I fear Then suddenly you went back to avery precise way of flying that was, unfortunately, the shapeof things to come.

The chop rate in those days was still horrendous, fivefrom 79 Squadron in the two and a half years I was on it.Admittedly it was something you had grown up with andtook for granted in the rather blase fashion of those days.When I was converting on to jets at Full Sutton I kept a pagein my scrap book simply for newspaper cuttings reportingfatal crashes - in a very short time it was almost full. Manyhad been my friends. In the crewrooms in those days therewere always course photographs stuck up so you knew whowas who. It was customary, as someone killed himself. todraw a little halo over his head grim humour' I once saw a'bone dome' that belonged to a pilot on a Sabre squadronwith 'Dig here for Charlie' written across the top

Obviously it was slowly realised that this wastage ofmanpower had to be stopped, and this is where CFS came in.It was a return to reality after the post-war years, makingpeople realise the limitations in themselves and their aircraft.People were brought to understand they had to fly in a moreresponsible and considered way. Nowadays, the chop rate isvirtually nil, which proves the changes were right. but it hastaken away much of the JOY of flying. It was wonderful to be apilot in the fifties you were always doing things to proveyou could do them, like flying under bridges or high tensionwires. In one 2nd TAF exercise, for instance, word wentround that if you flew down the autobahn you should keep tothe right so as to miss anyone coming the other wayl

Kev Darling, now a Corporal AfT/A, first met theProvost at Halton

When I first joined the RAF, the piston Provost was the maintraining aid at Halton. It was later replaced by the Hunter andthe Jet Provost T.4, both of which are in turn being replacedby the Jaguar

The sight of so many piston Provosts in various states ofdisassembly and reassembly was quite daunting, but as timewore on we became used to it. After our initial training, wemoved to the airfield at Halton where we had to learn how tomarshal a Provost. This particular beastie was driven by apilot whose main aim seemed to be to induce in us trainees arespect for the turning propeller He certainly succeeded; in

fact. the result bordered on abject fear, as he appeared to usto ignore the marshallers' signals and chase the poorunfortunate across and around the airfield. It was notunknown for the airman to make a break for the hangar andgo and hide there He certainly kept us fit though I

My memory is that. like its jet-powered successor, thepiston Provost's flying controls were operated by cables,control being entirely manually assisted by balance tabs onall five surfaces. Trimming assistance was provided by trimtabs at the ailerons and elevators, possibly the port aileronand starboard elevator as in their jet-powered cousins.

The hydraulic systems on the piston Provost wereextremely simple, only being required for the brakes andthe flaps. To ensure adequate reserved hydraulic pressurefor engine-off brake and flap usage, accumulators were fittedin the hydraulic circuit. The accumulators were located inthe rear cabin. Hydraulic power whilst flying was providedby an engine driven pump.

The aircraft electrical power supplies were 24-voIt withexternal starting from trolley. Internal power was providedby a 24-volt generator, which also ran the hydraulic pump.Emergency power was available from 24-volt emergencybatteries located in the port and starboard sides of thefuselage which were capable of being fully aerobatic withoverflow drains fitted, as acid does nasty things toaluminium

The fuel system comprised wing bags made of fuelresistant rubber compound, each fitted with a fuel contentssensor to provide both port and starboard totals plus anoverall total. To ensure aerobatic capability, the fuel systemwould have incorporated a fuel booster pump, in addition tothe normal item and a recuperator A recuperator is acontainer with a rubber diaphragm fitted in the middle, onone side of which is a low pressure air supply of 5-6 psi, andon the other is maintained a small amount of fuel which isforced to the engine by the air pressure when the aircraft isinverted Incidentally, the reason many aircraft have bagtanks is the habit that integral tanks (which are sealedportions of airframe) have of leaking - witness the Buccaneerand Lightning.

The Provost airframe was of standard all-metal stressed­skin construction, mainly single skin except for the wingswhich were of double skin construction to provide a smoothsurface and also to increase structural integrity. Airframesystems consisted of windscreen de-icing, windscreen!canopy de-misfing and a fairly crude (by today's standards)air conditioning system. Also fitted were windscreen wipersfor use in inclement weather

Overall, therefore, in comparison with the Jet Provost.the piston Provost was a much simpler aircraft to maintain,with those experienced on the latter able to transfer theirskills to the former

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

A round the end of the Second World War, AirMinistry Specification T.7/45 was issued for athree-seat advanced trainer to be power­

ed by a turboprop engine. This attracted a number ofentries, among them the Avro 701. Blackburn B.52,Boulton Paul Pl08 and Miles M.70. The Avro andBoulton Paul entries were both accepted initially, andeach firm was authorised to construct four prototypes,later cut back to three.

,\.~..

Specification (Balliol T.2)One 1,245 hp Rolls-Royce Mer1Jn 35.Span 39 ft 4 In, length 35 it llj2in, height 12 it 6 In,Wing area 250 sq ft.Empty 6,730lb, loaded 8,410 lb.Maximum speed 288 mph at 9,000 it, cruiSIng speed220 mph, initial climb 1,790 it/min, range 670 miles,endurance 3 hrs, service ceilIng 32,500 it.

• $

Such was he need seen for this new aircraft that inOctober 1946, before any of the proto ypes could fly,the wo firms were each asked to produce 20pre-production aircraft under Specification 29/46P.Three months la er this order was modified, and theSpecification reissued in respect only of the BoultonPaul entry, now named he Balliol T.!. A newSpecification, 47/46P, was issued to cover he Avroentry, which became the Athena T.l.

The original proposal had been for both types ofaircraft to be fi ted with the Rolls-Royce Dart, but at theend of 1946 it was decided to change this to theArmstrong-Siddeley Mamba. As this was not yetavailable in sufficient numbers, the first Balliolprototype flew in May 1947 with a conventional BristolMercury radial engine. On 24 March 1948, however, itbecame the first aircraft in the world to fly with a singleturboprop engine, having in the meantime beenrefitted with a Mamba. Supplies of these had nowbecome available, and the other two Balliol prototypeswere similarly fitted. The Athena was longer inappearing, and he first pro otype did not fly until June1948, with a Mamba engine, but the next twoprototypes reverted to the originally proposed Dart.

In he meantime, however, official interes in theurboprop concep had waned. Consequently a new

Specification (T.14/47) had been issued in mid-1947 formodified versions of each design, to be conventionaltwo-seat trainers fitted with Rolls-Royce Merlins, andthe pre-production aircraft were to be completed tothis formula, being redesignated Athena T.2 and BalliolT.2. In addition, four prototype T.2s were ordered fromeach firm, the first Boulton Paul machine flying in July1948, and its Avro counterpart three weeks later.

By early 1950 the requirement was for asingle-engined monoplane for advanced flying trainingleading up to operational training on both single­engined and multi-engined aircraft. It was to be ofrobust all-metal construction with modern handlingcharacteristics, and was to be used either during theday or at night for dual flying instruction, includingaerobatics. Advanced pilot training needs includedlong cross-country flights, dual front gun training anddual low-level, glide and dive bombing training.

Its construc ion was to be such that in the even of awheels-up landing, the shock of impact would be takenby crushing the underpart of the body, which had to becapable of protecting he rest of the aircraft, so that thedamaged parts could be easily repairable. The brakeshad to be capable of standing up to repea ed landingsand long periods of taxiing.

Testing at Boscombe Down had led to a number ofchanges in the design of both machines, including anal ered ailplane incidence in the Balliol and a new finand rudder on he Athena. When competitively testedat the Central Flying School, the Balliol was consideredcrisper than the Athena, and allowed the student to

exploi his abili y bet er. I was considered hat thismachine would allow greater precision to be incul­cated in the pilot. The Athena suffered from too high aweathercock stabili y, had less effec ive ailerons, andheavy foot loads were required which made aerobaticsslovenly.

Boscombe Down agreed with these cri icisms, andalso made the point hat in heir view the longi udinals ability of the Athena was too great at high speeds, andout-of- rim stick forces were 00 high. Bo h machinesme the nigh flying requirements, hough the CFSpreferred the Ballio!. The spin on both types could bevery unpleasant after the second turn, but here againthe CFS preferred the Balliol - recovery wasstraightforward in both cases. From the engineeringpoint of view there was little difference to choosebetween the two machines in normal servicing. TheAthena, however, required one-third more man-hoursthan the Ballio!. In addition, the Athena suffered greatertyre wear, and required more man-hours for eachchange. The overall conclusion was that the Athena wasthe better machine from the purely engineering pointof view, but the Balliol had the advantage when it cameto ease of servicing.

Boulton Paul Balliol FlO9 prototype with BristolMercury engine at Radlett

(Author's collection)

An engineering appraisal carried out a BoscombeDown on the second prototype Balliol T.2 (VW898)during July and August 1949 reported favourably on anumber of features. Many of the components wereinterchangeable between por and starboard, therewere built-in jacking and slinging points, and gooddefuelling arrangements. The undercarriage wasdesigned to lower and lock by gravi y, and there was asimple mechanical indicator to show that the wheelshad locked down. Special attention had been given tohe design of the undercarriage legs, so that strutbending would be minimal and tyre wear would not bea great problem. Whilst the undercarriage mechanismwas satisfactory it would, however, require carefulattention during servicing.

Above:Avro Athena prototype VMl25, unsuccessful contenderfor the advance trainer reqUirement

(Author's collection)

Below:The Balliol fitted, as originally specified, with theArmstrong Siddeley Mamba.

• £ ) ; ~_.If• "'Jll\.;

The machine was not entirely without criticism. Inmost areas there was ample access for inspection, butdifficulties could be encountered in reaching thestarter motor and various components behind theengine. During 100 hours of intensive flying, however,the only major defect encountered was a failure of thefuselage frame to take wheel loads, but this was notseen as a great problem, since it would be a relativelysimple matter to modify the structure to overcome theweakness.

The general assessment of this machine was that itwas pleasant to fly, but its pilot would be required toexercise a fair degree of skill, accuracy andconcentration. It ought therefore to make a goodtraining aircraft

By the time a decision came to be made inFebruary 1950, it was fairly obvious which way it wouldgo. Despite the effort involved in winning the contract,however, the Balliol was destined not to fulfil Itspromise. An initial order for 500 machines had beenenvisaged under Specification T.14/47 Issue 2, buteconomy prevailed, and when the contract was placedit was actually for 100 Balliol T.2's under SpecificationT 14/47 Issue 3. Additional orders were placed inJanuary 1951 for 138 machines to be built by the parentcompany, and a further 120 under sub-contract byBlackburns.

These had no sooner been placed, however, thanthere was a change in official thinking, it being decidedthat the piston-engine was outmoded for advancetraining, and would give way to the Jet engine. Thesecond Boulton Paul order was consequently cut backto only 40 machines, and the Blackburn order wasreduced to 30. Five further replacement machineswere later ordered, bringing total production up to 175aircraft, but only one Flying Training School everreceived them, this being 7 FTS at Cottesmore, thoughquite a number were used by other units, such as theRAF College at Cranwell and No 238 OperationalConversion Unit at Colerne. The Athenas saw littleservice, being mainly used by the RAF Flying College,before they were withdrawn.

The Royal Navy also had a requirement for apiston-engined trainer around this time, with deck­landing capabilities, and Specification N.I02D wasaccordingly issued on 26 August 1950. Two pre­production Balliols were fitted with arrester hooks fortrials in HMS Illustrious, a third such machine (VR599)being completed as the true prototype Sea Balliol T.21,having its maiden flight on 23 October 1952. Thissatisfied the requirement, and an order for 20 machinesfollowing, ten more being procured later. Balliols werelargely withdrawn from service in 1956 and Sea Balliolsin 1959.

In December 1949, Squadron Leader Stan Green­how was one of several staff OFIs at CFS invited to flyboth the Balliol and Athena, and to give their opinions

as to which was the better of the two aircraft forsubsequent use as a trainer to replace the ageingHarvard

There was little to chose between them. They were solid,roomy and docile, and easy to fly. Moreover, the instructorsat beside the student and could observe checks and pointsof handling which were difficult to be aware of behind thestudent as in the Tiger Moth and Harvard. Lookout was good,climb, glide, circuits and landings, medium and steep turnswere all good, and steep turn and aerobatics and spins wereall that one could wish for from a trainer aircraft. Thelandings were particularly easy and very solid, with littletendency to bounce even on a tarmac, and my studentsappeared to like them both. Along with many of my fellowQFls, I plumped for the Athena of course it was the Balliolwhich eventually made its way into the flying training world,and the Athena disappeared into the mists.

Incidentally, I remember that both the Athena and Balliolsuffered from the drawback of having a fairly flat windscreenwhich tended to mist over in fog and rain. I cannotremember if it iced over under freezing conditions.

lt is now almost 40 years since I flew these types, andalthough clear recollection of handling characteristics is a bitdifficult, I enJoy a contented feeling when I think of theAthena and Balliol, so they must have been all right.

Ray Hanna, a former Red Arrows leader, in­terviewed at Duxford, recalls of the type:

I wasn't instructed in the Balliol, but I remember it as beingvery noisy and a bit rattly. I had never flown in aMerlin-engined aeroplane before, and if I remember rightlythe engine was derated, so one was immediately aware oflots of noise and rattles and bangs and pops and things, andas I recall worse than we have seen and heard here todaywith the Spitfire and the Mustang.

I only had two trips in it, but it was a very niceaeroplane. From what I have heard from students that flew inthem, it was maybe a little bit over the top for some of them.Cranwell and Cottesmore had them for people who weregoing from Prentices to Balliols as opposed to Prentices toHarvards. They had air brakes fitted to teach people2dvanced flying before going on to aeroplanes such asMeteors and Hunters, and lherefore accustom them to whatwas coming in the future. I think it was really a bitunnecessary. It had a relatively high wing loading.

From the instructor's point of view, I'm sure it wasdelightful, because it had a superb field of view. Sittingalongside the student, you could see exactly what was goingon. I know they had one or two accidents, though, withstudents overshooting the runway because they had messedup the approach or whatever, giving it full power and goinground the propeller and hitting the ground - the dreadedtorque stal!. I think the Balliol was perhaps a little bitoverpowered for students at that stage in training. I've saidfor many years, though, that we would love to get our handson one, to have here at Duxford, as it would be an idealtrainer for our sort of fun.

I do recall that around 1952 or 1953, when we were outin Germany on fighter reconnaissance in Meteors, three orfour Balliols being sent out from one of the establishments for

ground attack trials. The Air Staff looked at it quite seriously,but obviously it didn't come off.

Commander Maurice Tibby had expenence onboth the Balliol and the Sea Balliol, the latter as CO ofNo 727 Squadron:

I first encountered the aircraft when I was a staff instructor atthe Central Flying School, Little Rissington in the earlymonths of 1950. That establishment was asked to carry outthe comparative service trials b~tween the Balliol and theAthena. I flew them both at the time, and seem to recall thatthey were extremely similar rather like two peas in a pod.In fact the Athena seemed to be a more docile performer,and one can only presume that the Balliol got the vote forpolitical or other reasons. At the time it was meant to heralda new era of side-by-side training to follow on from thepiston Prentice, but it never seemed to catch on and only afew were ordered. Perhaps they were overtaken by the jetera.

When 727 Squadron recommissioned at Brawdy inJanuary 1956, it was primarily tasked with providing airexperience for Dartmouth Cadets which was a compulsorypart of their training. We were equipped with Balliols forpiston flying, Vampires for jet flying and Sea Princes fornavigation, and therefore well placed to show a broad viewof naval aviation.

The Balliol was a robust aeroplane and adequatelypowered by its Rolls-Royce Merlin. With its wide undercar­riage it was not difficult to handle during take-off andlanding, but was lively enough to ensure concentrationduring these key phases. In the air it was a versatileperformer although somewhat unexciting; it was cleared forall aerobatic manoeuvres and spinning, and was flown bothby day and by night. The cockpit was quite roomy withparticularly good all-round visibility. We were not allowedto deck land them and the Balliols in 727 were not cleared forthis; had they been so then this would not have presentedany problems. In summary it was a strong, useful all-roundtrainer with no particular vices and much to commend it.

I suspect that at some time or other it was intended thatthe Balliol would be fitted with a gun and/or bomb sight forarmament training - there was plenty of room for one - butthe 727 aircraft were not so fitted. At the time (1958), thefront-line squadrons used to carry out a concentrated periodof training called a Front-Line Armament Practice School(FLAPS) when they concentrated entirely on variousbombing/rocketing firing practices. During that year in 727we had a three-week period without any Dartmouth Cadets,and I instituted our own Second-Line series of firingexercises (SLAPS). Without any gunsights we used achinagraph pencil on the windscreen; the position had to beadjusted for each pilot, and with this basic device (+) wemanaged to achieve a similar standard to front-linesquadrons.

It was also another way of demonstrating the capabilityof the Balliol since rocket firing and bombing gave us noserious logistic problems. I really cannot think of any otherunusual attributes, it was a very versatile aeroplane andwould undoubtedly have acquitted itself well if it had beenmore fUlly adopted.

Chris Ashworth recalls:

My acquaintance with the Balliol was comparativelyshort-lived and straightforward, for I neither trained norinstructed on this impressively bulky and powerful aircraft.The year was 1957 and the place White Waltham, the aircraftbelonging to the Home Command CommunicationsSquadron.

Perhaps it was the Balliol's angular wings, the way it saton its wide track undercarriage, its four-bladed propeller,or more likely a combination of all three, that gave it theaggressive look which must have stretched the confidence ofmost pupils to the limit. In fact, despite tales of torque stallsand a vicious spin, it flew quite nicely if treated with respect.

The starting drill for the Merlin 35 was typical of the timeand not unduly complicated. Once it was going, enginetemperature control was normally automatic, which was agreat boon though I was suspicious of it because the similarGriffon engine controls on Shackletons invariably leaked in'Auto'. My concern was unfounded - they never gave anytrouble on the Ballio!.

The large nose completely obscured the view aheadwhilst taxiing, so it was back to a Chipmunk-style 'weave',but the take-off was impressive, especially on WhiteWaltham's uneven turf, a lot of rudder being needed to keepstraight. The famous Waltham 'bump' threw the aircraft intothe air in a most disconcerting fashion. This would not be aproblem experienced by pupils at Cottesmore and Cran­well, but the incredible amount of trimming required once inthe air undoubtedly was - the Balliol being the only aircraft Ihave come across on which aileron, elevator and rudder hadto be retrimmed for every speed or power change. Thatmust have been a nightmare for both pupil and instructor ­though any of the former who mastered it would never be ata loss in any other aircraft.

Once airborne and trimmed, the Balliol was pleasantenough. Cross-country flying was great, economical cruisebeing about 180 knots which meant that at 2,000 feet or so thecountryside really slipped past at a useful rate. Rudder andaileron controls were good, but I recall the aircraft as heavyon the elevators. I never pretended to be the world's ace ataerobatics but I could loop most aeroplanes pretty well. Notso the Balliol - and as for stall turns they were a disaster I Atleast the one I tried was, for instead of the aircraft gentlyrotating about its axis when vertical it refused to yaw, thepropeller stopped turning and I 'hammer-headed' out of it.The ground began to look quite close as I pulled out of theensuing dive and I only regained my composure when theengine spluttered into life again.

Circuits were great fun - the chance for frustratedwould-be Spitfire pilots to try the famous curved approach.Once lined-up and in the 'round-out' the wide trackundercarriage took charge and a gentle three-pointer waseasy.

Flying the Balliol was an interesting experience, but Iwould not have liked to do my advanced training on it ­thank the Lord for the good old Harvard l

Flight Lieutenant Peter Bouch, lately of the Battle ofBritain Memorial Flight, also flew the Balliol

I got about 50 hours in the Balliol and found it to be an

excellent advanced tramer, wIth a hIgh-power Merlm 35 (thesame engmes now muse m the Hurncanes of he BBMFI),nicely balanced controls, a mce wIde track undercarnageand a lockable tallwheel These gave It predic able landmgand ground handlmg charactenstlcs, but It was demandmgenough to be considered qUlte a handful In fact there wereseveral fatal accidents, most of whIch I seem to rememberbemg pu down to torque stallmg on the approach orovershoot orque stall basIcally meant the airframerevolvmg around the engine l ThIs was one of the monthlypractice requirements (at heIght I hasten to addl) and wouldoccur if you got the speed low (approachmg the stall), heldthe stick back and fully opened the throttle I It would notwork if you eased the stick forward as the throttle wasopened, so If it was the cause of the accIdents then they werecaused by either ignorance or poor instructionl

I liked the Balliol there is something about having aMerlin in front of you BBMF would jump at one for theirtrainer but unfortunately there are none about.

Boulton Paul Balliol T2 WG14l 'N' of No 238Operational Conversion Unit being serviced at NorthLuffenham around 1947.

(Eric Sharp)

Boulton Paul Balliol VW899, the third prototype T2,tested at the Aeroplane and Armament ExperimentalEstablishment, Boscombe Down.

(Author's collection)

Another Balliol trainee was Peter Raeburn:

I trained on the Balliol in 1955 at RAF Cranwell Surprisinglyit had only a limited span as an advanced trainer, replacingthe long-lived American Harvard

Imtial traming was on the ChIpmunk, and the change to amore potent, heaVIer aircraft seemed most marked,espeCIally as the Balliol was powered by the Merlin, albeItderated to a much reduced boost. Under normal circum-

; ,

~-.Ii. till) jp;

Boulton Paul Balliol T2 WNS16 'CC' of the RAF Collegeat Cranwell around 19S5,

(Wing Cdr Robert Sage)

stances the aIrcraft was fun to fly, a really stable,manoeuvrable platform and an excellent introduction toadvanced flying training. That being said, however, thereare two particular points I will never forget. First, havingcome from the docile Chipmunk, which was virtually apowered glider, the Balliol's high rate of descent whengliding for practice forced landings etc, led to the usualdescription that 'it flies like a brick-built shithouse'l

A more alarming trait, with more disastrous potentialand which was practiced at height to familiarise pilots withthe problem, was the torque stall When full power wasabruptly applied from low revs at low speeds near a stallingconfiguration, the aircraft tried to revolve arou d the proplSo much power was applied, the prop could not absorb itfully Consequently he excess torque started to affect theaircraft itself and it s arted to revolve This was notdangerous a height, but when overshootmg from amissed/bad approach to landing, ie close 0 the ground, in anear stalhng configuration when full power application fromnear Idling is paramount, problems could and in fact didoccur One student found himself cartwheeling down herunway wmgtIp first, luckily emerging unhurt from hewreckage

Unfortunately for pilots desti ed for fighters, the Balliolwas one's last acquaintance with piston engined airHaft, ason course completion and the award of wings, one wasimmediately posted to a jet conversion unit to update on tojet aircraft.

James McNamara worked on Balliols as an enginefi er during the summer of 1954, when he was one ofseveral people 'volunteered' to supplemen he groundcrews for a Universi y Air Squadron summer camp:

The Balliol itself was an aggressive sort of small aeroplane,often referred to as a sawn-off Spitfire. Those of us who hadsome experience of them quite liked them from theengineering point of view, as they were quite accessible. Imyself was concerned with the engine, in this case theMerlin 35.

The airframe people either loved or hated it, dependingon the particular tasks they had to perform. The pneumaticscould be a bit strange. It had interchangeable controlsurfaces, so that you could exchange ailerons left to right,and it also had tailplane halves and elevators in common Itwas quite a well thought out machine. One thing you had tobe careful with, hough, was the electrically-operatedcanopy, which was very heavy indeed, so you had to makesure you kept your fingers out of the way

The mstallation of the erlin was very, very straightfor­ward, because it came built-up as a complete power unitUsing a crane and a big sling, you lowered the unit on 0 thefront bulkhead of the machine, then Imed up the top bearera tachment arms and looked through them 0 see If they werereasonably well aligned There was a bIg temptation to pokeone's finger in hem, which of course was hIghly dangerousI remember being told by my grizzled old Chlefy that it wasa good way to stop anyone biting heir nalls l Once the optwo ttachments were in, the unit was lowered down a littlemore until the bottom ones were lined up. It was then simplya question of tying up all the wires, servicing the fuel systemand so on, put ing a propellor on the front, then checking it

Vickers Varsity prototype VX828 in September 1949.(RAP Museum Photo No P100640)

·...r-t -....

out. The propellor was a four-bladed de Havilland affair, alittle over 11 feet in diameter. Installation was very, verystraightforward. Just put it on, tighten it up and off you went.The installation of the Merlin was so neat and simple that itwould only take us about three hours to have the thing in andrunmng.

I remember on one occasion we had an example of whatwas known as the three-minute, or lightly-boiled, Merlin. Wedid all the usual checks on it for safety, but then decided toremove the engine Just in case. We then put in a new oneand I had an absolutely superb ride on the subsequent airtest.

One thing common to all Merlins is that you have tomake absolutely sure that the air intake for the radiator isclear of any foreign objects. It is very easy for it to getblocked up with things like bits of grass, straw andnewspapers.

As regards ground running of the aeroplane, again onehad to use one's loaf. One had to point the thing into windand tie it all down and so on, because it was very tricky andone had to keep a very close eye on the coolanttemperatures all the time.

I was very impressed with the Balliol, and thought it anexciting aeroplane. It was extremely noisy, though, andcoming downhill it would dive very, very quickly. Theground really seemed to rush up at you, but it had powerful

Boulton Paul Sea Balliol T2l on the deck of a carrier.(via Brian Lowe)

air brakes, and when they were deployed you were reallygrateful that you had a very good harness and a strongaeroplane around you.

It had its darker side. It had a fantastic stall which I'mafraid caused some quite horrendous accidents. I rememberone day two young ashen faced chaps getting out of one andreferring to the 'steaming little machine' as the Boulton PaulBitch. Nevertheless, it was an aeroplane which was muchliked by those who knew it well and could keep in control,but by the nGvice it was viewed with a certain amount oftrepidation. It was an aerc5plane that did require a great dealof respect - it wasn't a simple thing.

But what a superb noise it made, like any Merlin, ofcourse, especially when landing. Over the fence, throttleback and then you heard this lovely, lovely popping soundas the power came off - it was quite something. I rememberespecially one lovely summer's day, with meadow larkssinging and then the sound of a Merlin approaching. It wasquite something and I don't think I'll ever quite forget that. Iwas privileged to have worked on one - I regard it as one ofmy better times.

Vickers Varsity T.1 WF331 'M' ofNo 5 Flying TrainingSchool at Oakington around 1971.

(Paddy Porter collection)

/

t.

-- --Hawker Hunter T.7 XL605 of No 92 SquadronLeconfield, visiting RNAS Hal Far, Malta around 1962.

(A.E. Hughes)

Hawker Siddeley pre-production Gnat XM693, the firstto be fitted with full dual control. (British Aerospace)

RN Jetstream T.3 with manufacturer's marking G-3l­659, first flown in May 1986 at Prestwick, and delivereda year later to No 750 Squadron at Culdrose as ZE440.Note the fuselage bulge housing the relocated RacalASR 360 search radar. (British Aerospace)

•.., ,

ROYAL

RN Jetstream T.2 XX483 '562' of No 750 Squadron atCuldrose. (RNAS Culdrose)

G- -659

cdJ® [)={]@wD ~ ~@mJcdJ

C[Mj 0[P)M [U] mJ~

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

SpecificationOne 145 hp de Havilland Gipsy Major 8.Span 34 it 4 in, length 25 it 5 in, height 7it 0 in, wingarea 172.5 sq it.Empty 1,417 1b, loaded 2,000 lb.Maximum speed 138 mph at sea level, cruisingspeed 119 mph, initial climb 800 it/min, range 300miles, endurance 2.3 hrs, service ceiling 16,000 it.

• £ ; !

~-.I.'• • q r.;

(RAF Museum)

Shor ly after the end of the Second orld War,he RAF had a need 0 replace the ageing Tiger

Mo hs initially issued 0 the numerouspos -war Reserve Flying Schools and Universi yAirSquadrons. Sudies of he needs of these units led earlyin 1948 to he issue of Specification T.8j48 for a newelementary trainer of more advanced monoplanedesign, and wo contenders emerged, the FaireyPrimer and the de Havilland Chipmunk, both based onexisting aircraft.

The Fairey submission was a development of theTipsy M, which had been built by their Belgiansubsidiary company, Avions Fairey SA at Gosselies, tothe design of E.O. Tips, who designed a series of Tipsylight aircraft both before and after the war. Hopeful ofan order, Faireys brought over the first prototypeOO-POM, which with manufacturers marking G-6-1 wasflown briefly before being dismantled at the Hayesfac ory, where jigs were then made for its intendedproduction.

The position at de Havillands was somewhatsimilar, heir Canadian subsidiary having already builan elementary trainer as an in ended replacemen forthe Tiger Moth in service with he Royal Canadian AirForce. By he ime the Air Minis ry Specifica ionappeared, early examples of his machine werealready in Bri ain.

The Minis ry of Supply invi ed tenders on he basisof a minimum order for 100, wi h provision for furtherorders up to a possible ultima e 750. Bo h enders weresubmitted in mid-May 1948, and Faireys offered tobuild 100 Primer airframes a £2070 each, this pricereducing to £1405 each for the nex 150, £1360 for a

further 250 and £1320 for a final 250. The firm proposeddelivery of he first batch within 13-14 months of acon rac being signed.

De Havilland's firs bid, submitted around the sametime, was considerably more expensive. They couldprovide an initial 100 machines for £4400 each,deliveries commencing in April 1949 and ending inMarch 1950. If he order was increased 0 250machines, this could be compie ed within three yearsand he price for each machine would drop to £3135.

The Belgian-bUilt Fairey Primer OO-POM, unsuccessfulcompetitor to the Chipmunk for the T.8/48 specifJcatlOn.It was later given Class B registration G-6-1 beforebeing dismantled at the Hayes factory for jigs to bemade for intended UK production.

An increase to 500 machines over four years wouldreduce the unit price to £2750, and an order for 750over five years would bring a final reduction 0 £2620each. The quo ation in each case would include £100per machine 0 help their Canadian subsidiary recoverits design and development costs. These prices did nottake into accoun fi men s, such as engines, propellers,ins rumen s. radios and harnesses, all of which wouldhave 0 be provided by he Minis ry.

Early in June, having learned tha hey were indanger of losing this contrac, de Havillands hadsecond thoughts. They wrote to the Ministry suggestingha they had not apprecia ed hat their q otations wereintended to be aken as a compe itive tender, and saidthey were not yet in a position to put in a firm price.

They asked for an opportuni y of reviewing their cos sof manufacture 0 see if his could produce a lowerproduc ion fig reo

The outcome was a fresh letter to bo h companiesin late July inviting formal tenders in competition.Before the tenders would be considered, however, anexample of each machine, equipped to RAF standards,had 0 be provided for comprehensive evalua ion andests. De Havilland accordingly made available theen h Canadian produc ion machine G-AJVD This wasstill to specification T.6j48, but it was decided to issue afresh specification, T.17j48, for the Primer, the machinesubmitted being G-ALEW, which had the manufac­turer's marking G-6-5, and was fitted with a 155-hpBlackburn Cirrus 3.

In the meantime both firms had taken a fresh lookat costings, and Fairey had now increased theirsslightly, ranging from £2150 each for the first 100 downto £1380 each for the last 250. De Havillands, however,had evidently realised that heir original pricing putthem in danger of losing this prized contract, and werenow quoting a much-reduced fla rate of £2100 each for100 upwards, irrespective of the size of the order.

Bo h machines were delivered in November 1948to he Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Estab­lishment at Boscombe Down for an urgen estprogramme, and he evalua ion reports were ready bymid-December. I emerged from this that heChipmunk had a slight but defini e superiority in bothhandling charac eristics and ease of maintenance,though the Primer scored slightly in ease of repair. Theonly real criticism of the Chipmunk was that it wouldno spin very easily, but it was thought that this couldbe cured by a simple modification to the rudder.

De Havillands costings still remained at £2100 permachine, but Faireys had in the meantime substantiallyrevised their tender upwards, to give a new price,ranging from £2590 each for the first 100, dropping to£1750 for the last 250. Over a lengthy production runthis would still work out less than the Chipmunk, but bynow the initial need was seen as only 200 machines, atwhich number the Chipmunk came out substantiallycheaper. Combined with he more favourable evalu­ation report this left no doubt as to which firm wouldwin the con ract, and on 25 February 1949 an order wasplaced for 200 Chipmunks T.lOs.

The Chipmunk, which is still in service 40 yearsla er, owed is origins to an idea by an exiled Polishdesigner, Wsiewolod J. Jakimiuk. He had beenresponsible before the war for a number of designsbuilt by PZL, the Polish ational Aviation Establishment,and had also worked on he de Havilland D.H.95Flamingo. In June 1940 he was offered to the CanadianGovernment by the Polish Government-in-exile, andaccordingly joine de Havilland Canada. By 1943 hisdesk carried a model of an idea for a low-wingmonoplane trainer to replace he Tiger Moth.

With he end of the war in sight i was possible todevote design ime 0 this concept. The first prototypeChipmunk, as it had become, flew at Downsview,Toronto on 22 May 1946 in he hands of Pa Fillingham,a test pilot sent from the parent Ha field company.Registered CF-DIO-X, i was of all-metal stressed-skincons ruction. and had a typical de Havilland eliptical­shaped fin and rudder, similar to tha of he Mosquito.The first flight was uneventful, and it looked from thestart as if the firm had a potentially successful machineon heir hands.

A few relatively minor problems were experi­enced. The metal fuselage was found to respond to thefrequency of the engine, but the resulting vibration wascured by fitting firmer rubber engine mountings. Aslight aileron over-balance was cured by a quarter­inch droop. The top was cut off the rudder at one stageto improve stability, but this idea was soon abandoned.After several attempts to improve stalling character­istics, stall bars were fi ted immediately under theleading edge of the wings. After modification, theprototype was shipped 0 England, and on 15 January1947 flew a Hatfield, being la er re-registeredG-AKEV.

Further modi ications were incorporated in theBri ish version. In place of the original D.H. GipsyMajor Ie engine, he RAF specified a 145 hp GipsyMajor 8 wi h a Coffman cartridge starter. Two 12 voltbatteries were fitted in a special compar ment aft of theluggage locker, and redesign of the panel and coamingwas necessary to enable a standard RAF blind flyingpanel to be fit ed. These alterations resulted in heCentre of Gravity moving forward, and there was nowsome tendency to ground-loop and s all recovery wasinadequate. These problems were overcome,however, by raking the undercarriage forward threeinches, increasing the rudder area, and fitting spinningstrakes.

Initial deliveries to the RAF began in February1950, but a second order had already been placed inMay 1949 for a further 100 machines. The first units toreceive them were the Oxford and CambridgeUniversity Air Squadrons, quickly followed by 0 22Reserve Flying School at Cambridge, and by the end of1951 most units of these two types had beenre-equipped. Due to expansion of the RAF as a resul ofthe Korean War, five Basic Flying Training Schoolswere set up in 1951 and 1952, and these too adoptedthe Chipmunk as standard equipmen. Aircraft werealso required for a rejuvena ed Rhodesian Air TrainingGroup, and further orders were consequen ly placed,even ually bringing total RAF production orders to 740aircraft. The final order was placed in December 1951,though many became surplus when all the ReserveFlying Schools were closed during 1953 and 1954 foreconomy reasons. Four members of the Royal Familyhave so far flown solo on the Chipmunk - Princes

• t

Philip, Charles, Andrew and Michael of Ken.In addition 0 RAF service, small numbers have

served with bo h he Army and the avy. When theArmy Air Corps was se up in September 1957, heElementary Flight a Middle Wa lop received 25Chipmunks, and this uni s ill exists under the itle BasicFixed Wing Flight. The Fleet Air Arm did not getChipmunks until 1966, however, when he Bri anniaFlight of the Britannia Royal aval College a Dartmouthreceived 12 Chipmunks, these aircraft being still basedat Roborough, Plymouth, giving air experience to navalofficers.

From 1973 the Chipmunk was largely replaced inthe RAF by the Bulldog, but numbers are still beingflown by Air Experience Flights and the FlyingSelection Squadron. The Chipmunk also fulfilled itsoriginal purpose as an RCAF trainer, and many went toother air forces, some of these also being still inservice. The RAF plans to keep its surviving aircraft inservice for another 20 years, a ribute to its originaldesign.

Dick Smerdon recalls:

My logbook shows that I first met the Chipmunk i January1953, and between that date and 1978 I pu in quite a fewhours on the aircraft. Three-pointing a TIger Moth hasprepared me for the landmg problem, if any, and theHarvard tallwheel had taught me to be careful of castoring ifthere were a crosswmd I was used to the engmeCarburettor air on hot unless one broke the wire was anovelty. The method of setting the differential brake fortaxIing was new to me, but I must admIt that I never landed aChipmunk with any brake set, m case I overdid he countingof clicks and because it was such an alien action in thepre-landing vital actions.

The cartridge starter was a godsend in single-crew

Above:De Havilland Chipmunk prototype CF-DIO-X, whichwas later shipped to England to become G-AKEV

(Author's collection)

Facing page, top:De Havilland Chipmunk T.iO WB754 'H' of the Army AirCorps at Middle Wallop in 1958.

(School of Army Flying Museum)

Facing page, bottom:De Havilland Chipmunk T.iO WP930 T of the Army AirCorps in formation with others near Middle Wallop in1963.

(School of Army Flying Museum)

operation without the benefit of groundcrew, when oper­ating for Maintenance Corrunand Cartridge starting was alsovalued when visiting work services and ex-flying stations,when there was sufficient length of grass for safe landing andtake-off.

The fact that I flew so many Air Training Corps andCadet Force cade s, and that they were not to be subjectedto negatIve g, resulted m my aerobatlcs becoming toosmooth, with rolls being performed as 'chicken rolls' Thatthis kept the engme runnmg was an added bonus

I am ot sure why eight turn spms had to be performed,but I recall that it took three more turns to recover andquite a while for my eyeballs 0 return to normal

Squadron Leader Don Brit ain wri es:

The ChIpmunk was another aIrcraft which, like the Harvard,could ground-loop on you, but It did not have such apowerful engine. I remember checkmg out a 29 Squadron

• ~-.I.'• •Javel! pIlot up at Leuchars, and while runmng dow herunway WIth the tail up I saw a reflection m the front leftwindscreen you had to use tricks like that as you could seelittle of what was going on in the front cockpit of a glovedhand gomg down to the br ke lever. So I put my hand on thebrake lever in the back just in time to stop him applying thebrake - we would have nosed over' That's one of the reasonsI prefer side-by-side sea ing in the instructing world - youcan see what the little buggers are doi g, and side-by-sidesea ing later saved my life

I remember doing a practice forced landing atKlrton-m-Lmdsey I was a mce summer's day, so I dldn tbo her clearing the engine I though thIs was only 0 keepthe engine warm, but I soon learnt differently When I dIdapply power, not a lot happened as the plugs had oiled up. Itfarted and coughed quite a bit, and I thought I was going tocrash. The airfield boundary was pretty close, but the engineresponded all of a sudden and once again my laundry billwent up a shade. This is one of several occasions when I cansay I learnt about flying from that'

There is fibre cog on the magneto which often sheds afew ee h which hen buggers-up the timing They alwaysseem to go on ake-off. I had one up at Leuchars, but themisfiring engme did get me round he circUlt JUst.

The Chi py used to have I don know If It does nowamber screens put m It for Instrument flyIng with the pilotusing blue goggles, and It is jus like flyIng a night. The

. instructor of course can see nicely through the amberscreens. If you look on the right-hand side of the Chippy inthe front there is a hole which used to take a tube from yourblue goggles to suck out any condensation and stop themmisting up. Asking modern Chipmunk pilots what this tinyhole is can win you a pin.

I once changed a low-level aerobatic sequence withoutmuch thought. I put in an extra Porteous loop (roll of the topWI h fllck now forbidden), failing to take m 0 account theextra heIght loss as the engine cuts out under negative-g. Iquickly reahsed my error, though, when headingearthwards, as everything looked a bit close. Another thing Ilearnt.

Flight Lieu enant Peter Bouch flies the Chipmunkwith he Flying Selection Squadron a Swinderby:

The squadron consists of 12 instructors and 10 aircraft taskedwith giving elementary flying training to selected students ­those without previous formal training, ie, a FlyingScholarship or from a University Air Squadron. The coursetotals 63.15 hours - 44.15 dual and 1900 solo. The syllabuscompnses a full range of general handlmg, navigation,instrument flying and formation When a student fimshes ourcourse he then undergoes a shortened course on the JetProvost thus savmg a consIderable amount of moneyI

The Chipmunk was chosen for the Job, firstly because Itwas available and cheap, but much more important to theinstructors was the fact that it was robust, simple to operate,yet because of its tailwheel configuration quite demanding inits handling particularly on or near the ground. It is a verybasic, simple little machine, with nicely balanced controls,fully automatic, spinnable (up to eight turns), and ideal forthe full RAF primary flying syllabus. It is considered by mostto be reasonably easy to fly safely but dIfficult to fly well Infact I would rate it as he most demanding of all our traimngaircraft from the pure handling point of view - and I haveflown hem all, WI h he exception of he Tucano and I don'tthink that would alter my opmion el herl

On the plus side we have a simple, robust, I!ght, cheap,reliable aircraft, easy to maintain, operatmg equally wellfrom grass or concrete, and yet demanding of the student.Against, we have the fact th t it is under-powered (slow toheight and slow cruising speed), the engine will not runinverted (limiting the more advance aerobatics), and with asingle radio fit is not allowed to penetrate more than 5/s ofcloud if the base is below the local safety height. Also the factthat it IS light makes it vulnerable to strong winds a d

De HaVilland Chipmunk T 10 WB754 '21' of HullUniversity Air Squadron, seen at Leeming in June 1953.

(Sqn Ldr D. W Warne)

crosswinds, so we have to be fairly careful with it. Havingsaid all that, it is still the best aircraft for the job l It is amuch-loved old aeroplane - excellent for he ask and likelyto outlast many of its successors.

The school is the biggest Chipmunk user, all the AirExperience Flights use Chipmunks, and the Ba tle of Britain

emorial Flight, which I have recently left, has a ChIpmunkwhich hey use to tram up heir potential display pilo s in themysteries of ail wheel piston engine flying before they areallowed to get their hands on the priceless Hurric nes andSpitfires.

Squadron Leader Mike Sparrow flew theChipmunk as a QF! with the University of BirminghamAir Squadron in 1965-68, and again wi h the Royal avyGrading Squadron at Plymouth:

It IS a superb and well-loved basic training alrcraf Wellbalanced, ligh on he con rols and seemingly capable ofabsor ing for ever all the punishment student pilo scanInflict upon it. The carburettor is prone to icing so mostaircraft have carb heat control wired in the hot position. (TheNavy Chipmunks at Plymouth are an exception as extrathrust is needed for take-off.)

On a UAS the squadron R/T call-sign was 'India',followed by a number - 01 to 10 for instructors, and 20onwards for solo students. There came the inevitable daywhen a not-so-bright student found himself above cloud and,to put it kindly, 'uncertain of his position'. After much R/Tchat he eventua Iy got his compass and direction indicatorsynchronised and was given a heading to steer for base. Athis stage he controller wanted to know whether he student

De HaVilland Chipmunk T10 WP967 'F' of the Glasgowand Strathclyde University Air Squadron at Perth in1970

(MAP Photo)

was In cloud, so asked hIm, Lost student, are you onins ruments?' After a long silence, he repeated the queryAfter yet, another lengthy silence, a puzzled VOlce, replied,'No, I'm on a parachute'. The frustrated controller thensn pped, 'Lost student, I mean are you IMC; that is IndiaMike Charlie?', to which he received the immediate, bright,sunny reply, 'No, I'm India 46 1' The student landed safely.

Sq adron Leader Michael eill now fliesChipmunks with 0 6 Air Experience Flight aAbingdon:

I started my flying traIning on ChIpmunks m January 1952,and have had a soft spot for them ever smce. Aftercompleting a tour in Germany I returned to the UK In 1956and completed the CFS course, returning there m 1958 aftera short tour instructing on the Piston Provost at the RAFCollege Cranwell. In 1959 I joined the Basic Examining Staff,and all the basic trainers were part of my responsibilities,and included examining instructors at flying clubs whichwere involved in the Flying Scholarship Scheme.

On one occasion I was tasked to examIne the CFI at aflying club in the south of England The test was conductedon a Tiger oth and inc uded a full general handl!ng sortIe.In the spinning exercIse he told me 'to recover from the

cadets These used up a tremendous number of 'bags,slckness', but would often mIss he bag and foul the cock it,the canopy and even the driver up front. After such a mishapthe aircraft would be returned to the lme, the engine shutdown, and the culprit ordered to clean up the mess withbuckets of hot water and disinfectant. They seldom did itproperly, though, and one of the ground crew would then benominated usually one of the riggers, of course. 'Get itclean', would be the command, and it really did have to beclean.

The pilots, who were often RAFVR types, wouldsometimes mdlcate to the waitmg groundcrew to help theunfortunate occupant of the rear cockpIt to dIsmount, whichthey were careful to do anyway because the cade was quitelikely to put a foot hrough he mainplane If there was no-oneto steer him When thIS happened there was much burmng ofmldmght 011 m he gloom of the hangar WI h two or threenggers fran Ically trying to repaIr the damage ready for thenext day's flymg I partIcularly recall one dazed li tle chapwho stepped out to starboard, and promptly dIpped out ofSIght The ngger tore around the tail to try to help hIm, onlyto find tha he had put both feet through the wmg, damaginghIS shms The ngger felt sorry for him, b t nearly as sorryfor hImself because he got a 'rollicking', and then had toeffect the repair he says his needlework was nearly up toGCE standard l

Apart from window cleaning there was little for a rigger

The aircraft has proved easy to maintain, and JohnNorris, who was a rigger stationed for a time atChivenor, recalls it wi h affection:

De Havilland Chipmunk T 10 fleet of No 6 AirExperience Flight lined up at Abingdon in 1986.

(RAF Abingdon)

It was a simple little machine that could not hide its wheels.All the controls were manual except the brakes which wereactuated by an enormous lever set to port of the cockpit. Iwas always tempted to shout 'Whoa' when hauling back onthe brake lever, because it put me in mmd of the woodenpoles that s age coach dnvers heave on in Wes ern hlms.The Chipmunks I worked on were on loan from vanousUASs, and they were used to gIve aIr expenence to ATC

Facing page:Pat FJ11Jngham, the original British Chipmunk test pilot,with Sqn Ldr Mike Neill, CUffing a cake on the 40thAnniversary of the type's first flight, dunng a visit to No6 Air Experience Flight at Abingdon in 1986.

(RAF Abingdon)

wIfe, convinced disaster was a out to ensue, dragged mywIfe from her sea saying that they mus re urn ImmedIatelyto the VIP lounge. My wife realised what was going on, andconsoled the American by saymg, ' ow don't you worryabout a thmg, it's a gravity feeds fuel system and the enginealways stops under negatIve-g , And sure enough, as theylooked up at the Chipmunk agam, It burst mto life with ItSusual puff of black smoke Both ladles sat down again with abIg smile on their faces to enJoy the remainder of thedIsplay

The Chipmunk is an attractIve aircraft and super to fly,but no easy to fly well and always presents a bIt of achallenge. Perhaps that's why even today all three servicesuse it as a primary trainer, and it does sort out the men fromthe boys. Spinning has not been a problem in the Chipmunk,but if you fail to 'contInue moving the control column forwarduntIl the spin stops' the recovery will not happen. TheChipmunk has the unofficial record of killing more seniorofficers than any other service aircraft, and it may be saidthat this stems from poor spin recovery technique.

'Over the years many have wanted to change theChipmunk put a new engine in or give it an inverted flightcapability, but that original design, by WJ Jakimiuk and histeam, produced a machine which has stood the test of tIme,and those who know the aircraft well would not change it. On22 ay 1986, 06 Air Experience Flight celebrated he 40thAnmversary of the firs flight of the Chipmunk and PatFJllingham, the original test pilot, attended the celebratIonsand flew again in the Chipmunk with OC the unit. PatFillmgham had not flown the ChIpmunk for 25 years whatwas hIS omment? 'it was like meetmg an old girlfnendagam'

•

spm apply full opposIte rudder, w it for he spin to stop,then move the control column forward to unstall the wmgsand recover from the dive' It worked on the TIger Moth, buIt was not standard spm recovery and such actlOn on theChIpm nk would be disas rous I wrote the est report somehme later, and stated that the spm recovery action was'being incorrectly taught' The CFI, on receiving he repor ,was extremely upse and msisted on a retest, on he groundsthat should here be any sor of acciden i he future myreport could be used in eVIdence. y boss thought I hadbeen harsh and he agreed to do the re-tes himself, andwrote a suitable report afterwards

I felt some concern that I could have been moredlplomatlc in my report, until one day I was examining acadet pJlot at a University Air Squadron, flying theChipmunk. On this occasion, I asked the student to show mea prolonged spin and to call out the recovery action. Afterabout six turns he said he was recovering and sang out, 'fullopposite rudder, wait for the spin to stop ... ' Of course thespin did not stop and I had to take control After landing Ibegan my debriefing with three statements, all of which thestudent agreed with I told him he had learnt to fly beforejoining the University Air Squadron; the name of his flyingclub; and the name of his instructorl After that I did not feelbad about the report I had written some months earlier Italso goes to show that first lessons learnt are hard to change.

Some years later I found myself as OC operatlOns at RAFGatow Berlin flymg he ChIpmunk once again I was invitedto give a low level aerobatIc display at the American Base atTempelhof dunng their 'Open House' celebratlOns My wifewas gIven a front sea and was escorted by an AmericanoffJcer's wIfe Dunng the dIsplay I go to a negatlve-gmanoeuvre and, of course, the engme cut. The American

• t

The Gloster Meteor Trainer first appeared as aprivate venture, demonstration aircraft G-AKPKmaking its first Oight on 19 March

1948 from the manufacturer's aerodrome at Brock­war h, and landing 26 minutes later at MoretonValence. Painted in high-gloss red with yellow

A civil-registered De Ha villand Chipmunk T.l0 flown inthe former marking of a Cambridge University AirSquadron aircrafi WD379 'K', seen at Wroughton in1986.

(Author)

to do on a ChIpmunk. The brake reserVOlr was easJlyaccessible and in any case rarely needed topping up Theoccasional wheel or brake unit change was simple. Tochange a tailwheel, no Jacks, trestles or assistance wereneeded; one simply applied the parking brake then,clutching a serviceable wheel, a 3/8 5/16 BSF spanner, apair of pliers and a hank of locking wire, crawled under thetail, heaved upwards and got on with it.

Two men could easily move a Chipmunk to or from theline. It could be done by one man, but this was ratherunwise One windy day a man attempting it single-handedhad it weathercock as he emerged from behind the hangers.It bowled him over and bobbed off at a canter down the roadtowards the MT section By the time he was back on his feet ithad a ten yard star on him and was gaining momentum, butfortunately it scraped a kerb and wung to a halt withoutdamage. The only serious danger for groundcrew was thepropeller, which was very easy to forget as I whirled awayrapidly and invisibly.'

There is no inverted fuel system, so the engine a wayscoughs and splut ers durin zero nega lve-g flight. It adds abit of drama when one IS domg a seq ence of aerobatics atan aIr showI Although flICk manoeuvres were and areprohibIted the Porteous Loop was allowed between 1964 and1968 This was a flick roll entered when inverted on top of a

loop, called Avalanche in civilian flymg circles. Most, if notall, Service aircraft are fitted wIth vertical accelerationrecorders to give an accurate assessment of fatigue life.

evil Gardner also had some ground experienceon Chipmunks:

Once, while preparing the aircraft for a repaint, I wasrelieved to discover that the pain stripper hadn't melted thespinner, when I realised tha it was made of fibreglass, andnot aluminium alloy as I had supposed

At Duxford in the seventies there was no grass runway,and I once watched a Chipmunk taxi off the apron andtake-off on he taxiway. The pilot had obviously considered itwasn't worth the long taxi to the runwayl'

Kev Darling had the dubious distinction of nearlysetting fire to a Chipmunk whilst under training atHalton.

I was detailed by a Chief technician to remove the batteryfrom a Chipmunk. Never having done so before, I asked howit was done. He explained in his forthright manner, and I thenwen off to do the job. Unfortunately for me, his explanationwas incorrect. Having attached my ratchet handle and socketto the lIve terminal, I proceeded to short out the battery onthe metal fuselage. ThIS resulted in a bright blue flash, abemused trainee mechanic (mel), an irate Chief, plus cloudsof carbon dioxide, as someone had thought here was a fireand had set off a fire extinguisherI Thankfully, as I was aramee, he rna ter died down rapIdly

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

(GJ ~ (Q)~~@ [J

[J¥j] @~@(Q) [J

U[J@)OITlJ@[J

trimming, it took advantage of the wings, rear fuselageand tail of the Meteor FA, and was similarly fitted withtwo Rolls-Royce Derwent 5 engines. Its length had beenincreased by 30 inches with the addition of a strongnew two-seat cockpit, built to withstand speeds inexcess of Mach 0.8, and containing complete dupli-

SpecificationTwo 3,600 lb thrust Rolls-Royce Derwent 5 or 8.Span 37 ft 2 in, length 43 ft 6 in, height 13 ft 8 in, wingarea 350 sq ft.Empty 10.540 lb, loaded 14,230 lb.Maximum speed 585 mph at sea level, cruisingspeed 535 mph, initial climb 7,600 ft/min, range 820miles, endurance 1.5 hrs, service ceiling 35,000 ft.

(Author's collection)

Coming down . .. Gloster Meteor T 7 aerobatic teamof No 8 Flying Training School.

Going up ... Gloster Meteor T7 WL364 goes vertical.(British Aerospace)

main wheels and held in a nose-up attitude until speeddropped off and the nose wheel made contact at about 70knots. During the landing approach and final touch-down theaircraft felt heavy and a 'bolter' (go-around) was neverpleasant to do.

Perhaps my dislike of this aircraft was why one, VZ646, Iwas f1ying on 14 January 1952, decided to try to kill mel Theweather was blowing a Force Nine gale at sea in the EnglishChannel Ihad been briefed to climb to 25,000 feet then carryout two radio-controlled descents, called QGH in those days.I did my take-off and climbed to 25,000 feet, then called for acontrolled descent and got my first 'steer' and height and

Gloster Meteor T7 WA634 fitted with non-standard tailunit, and used for Martin Baker ejector seat tests.

(British Aerospace)

undercarriage up and remember to brake the wheelssimultaneously. Holding the aircraft level until 165 knots, theflaps were then retracted. When 290 knots was reached, theclimb could be started. Remember all of this procedure took40 gallons of fuel .

When the required altitude was reached, the aircraftwas allowed to gain air speed until a figure of 0.70 Mach wasshown on the Mach meter The ailerons tightened upconsiderably at such Mach, whilst at the same time there wasa very defined nose-up tendency which, although the pilotcould trim out to some extent, he nevertheless had to applystrong forward stick force to counteract fully.

The Meteor T.7 took about seven minutes to climb to35,000 feet, and if flown to the maximum Mach of 0.70, theindicated air speed had fallen to 200 knots. If aerobaticswere to be flown, an air speed of 300 knots was required forslow rolls, whilst a loop needed 380 knots entry air speedand bags of height to be f1Bwn round Not a pleasant aircraftin any sense. Too heavy in handling. Too unstable in f1ightcharacteristics

On rejoining the airfield circuit for landing some 180/200knots was best for the downwind leg at 700 feet. Air speedwas controlled by both use of the air brakes and thethrottles. On the downwind leg the drill was to check brakepressure making sure of full at 450 psi, and at the crosswindleg, best flown as a descending curve, reduce speed to 160knots and select one-third flaps down Select undercarriagedown and check for three green lights. Throttle back to 140knots and as the final turn lined the aircraft up with thecentre-line of the duty runway, ensure the throttles weregiving engine revolutions of 7,500 minimum. This was toensure rapid opening-up if either a baulked or badly judgedlanding run occurred and the engines were to get theaircraft airborne again. On crossing the runway threshold at110 knots the aircraft had always to be landed on the two

A number of Meteors were used by naval trainingunits, and Commander Peter Bagley has vividrecollections of these:

whilst I was supposed to be doing IF. He even had the cheekto criticise my IF when he was actually flying it.

Another reason for disliking the side-by-side cockpit ­you can't keep hold of the controls - it tends to put thestudent off. I did my dual on a T.7, and then solo in a VampireFB.5. There was no resemblance at all in handlingcharacteristics. They got three airmen to sit on the tail boomsand said 'that's what it looks like on touchdown - off you go'.They forgot to say that the trim change in the Vampire wasquite pronounced when you put down flaps I had a hell of aJob in my first solo getting it down safely.

It was never a nice aircraft, having too many vices in myopinion. With a total of 400 gallons of fuel for its twin Derwentjet engines it burned 40 gallons at start-up and taxiing. Thenanother 40 gallons at take-off, whilst 60 gallons had to beconserved for use when joining the aircraft circuit as this wasabsolutely necessary for flying round again if a baulkedlanding or over-run occurred. Without this reserve it meanta possible forced landing and probable 'goodbye', so 140gallons were spoken for out of 400 total This gave Just onehours f1ight time, so accurate navigation was imperative.

Let's assume the pilot had done his ground checks andall was well He then climbed into the front of the largetwo-seater tandem cockpit, covered by an enormousperspex and metal-framed hood that weighed an absoluteton The hood was hinged on its right side, held open by ahydraulic strut and closed by pulling it down from right toleft.

Having strapped in (safety harness), connected oxygenbayonet fitting to aircraft supply, connected dinghy safetystrap, the hood was closed by the pilot. Next, both he and thegroundcrew checked the locks to ensure positive closureand locking, the pilot from inside, the groundcrew fromoutside The twin Derwent jet engines were then started andleft idling at around 7,500 revolutions per minute. Chockswere waved away after obtaining taxi clearance - usuallydone as the second engine fired up.

Most pilots did their take-off cockpit checks whilsttaxiing out to the duty runway. The drill was to check firewarning lights, flaps up, air brakes in, all three undercar­riage lights at green. Co-ordinate compass with directionindicator and uncage when lined up for take-off. Ensurecorrect radio channel selected. Set altimeter to airfieldheight so that it read zero height accurately. Ensure pitothead heater was on. Both low and high pressure cocks seton. Low pressure pumps set on. Then select one-third f1apdown, and ensure brake pressure is reading 450 psi.Recheck hood locks and request permission for take-off

When lining the aircraft up with the centre of therunway, move sufficiently far enough forward to straightenthe nose wheel Apply full brake and open the twin throttlesuntil 14,500 revolutions is shown on the rev counters Thenrelease brakes and keep straight by use of slight brake ifrequired, and the aircraft would soon get to 80 knots atwhich point backward pressure on the control column raisedthe nose wheel to the nose-up attitude. At 125 knots theMeteor T.7 f1ew off, whereupon the pilot had to select

I~

(MAP photo)

Below:All-black Gloster Meteor T 7 WL353 '574jHF' of 728Squadron at RN Air Station Hal Far, Malta around1963-65.

--

(MAP photo)

• UJl ) p;; ;

Above:Gloster Meteor T7 WH186 'MG' of No 215 AdvancedFlying School at FJnfllngley around 1953.

What had happened was that as Icame out of the cloud, aJersey Airways DH Rapide flying at 'nought feet' had sightedme and seeing a trawler making towards Newlyn Harbourhad 'buzzed' her redirecting to my fast drowning body. I wasgrateful, but at that moment was being stripped naked andhaving Calvados forced down my throat. I vaguelyremember some Flemish fisherman trying to take off mypilofs-type wrist watch and resisting that. I was dressed invery fishy blankets and eventually when the trawler gotalongside in Newlyn Harbour had to climb up aniron-runged ladder to the waiting ambulance.

All rescuers and the parachute packer were rewardedand thanked, and within three days I got into another MeteorT.7 and flew it - but not with enthusiasm.

As I had to go out to Malta to command the FleetRequirements Squadron which was equipped with a varietyof aircraft types including the dreaded Mosquito TT.39, along-nose type which could not maintain height on oneengine, I had to smother my fears and feelings and get on bysetting an example flying all types In later years this affectedmy health and I began a terrible saga of nightmares 'so mydoctors advised me to open up and tell the story sometimes.The first time I did so was to an old experienced Meteor T.7OCU wing commander - who told me that no-one had eversurvived a bail-out from this type 1 I did l

My conversion to jets was not at an Operational ConversionUnit, with lectures on jet propulsion and lots of flying. Insteadit was three hours on-the-Squadron training, and then awayyou go in a Meteor FA. Because of my Instructor category,and the inception of the RAF Instrument Rating scheme in1950, I was made an Instrument Rating Examiner, and spentmany hours in the back of a Meteor T.7. At first I didInstrument Rating Tests, then some jet conversion forex-University National Service officers, and later theconversion of a whole squadron from single-enginedVampires to twin-engined Meteors

Although the Mk7 did not have a wing planformconducive to really high speed, fatigue failure was not afactor we had to reckon with; it was a robust aircraft ACritical Mach Number of 0.86 was achieved at altitude in ashallow dive._ At low level, however, the aircraft could beflown at full throttle. It wag disappointing later when I flew theJavelin to find it placarded at 535 knots, although this wasonly at about half throttle. The method of demonstrating theMeteor T.7s rate of climb to my wartime piston-enginedfriends was a full throttle run at low level, then a pull up tolevel off at 10,000 feet.

Neither the pressurisation nor the heating in the Mk7were very impressive. Consequently what flights to 35,000feet did to us physically, I have no idea. It was certainlyfatiguing, even for a younger man, but the question waspostulated by a P2 Officer when I joined Fighter Command"Why do they send you old buggers to Fighter command" ­I was 27 1

The single-engined performance of the Meteor was somuch better than any twin I had previously flown I had shortthick legs, and I could lock on full rudder against the liveengine and carry out missed approaches above thecommittal speed and height. Then to save fuel, an engine

Dick Smerdon also has recollections of the Meteor:

•

speed from the ground controller. I had call sign CuJdroseTwo Two Zero. When the aircraft had descended to 18,000feet I was ordered to start a left-hand descending turn at 220knots As Idid so there was an almighty bang and the aircraftwent wild throwing my hands off both stick and throttles andbriefly winding me The aircraft shot into a violent nose-upattitude and stalled as it also began to spin. In mini-seconds Irealised the cockpit hood - that 2 cwt monster - hadunlocked, somehow breaking the large hydraulic strut fromits mounting point on the port side of the cockpit. Also theforward set of hinges was flailing around like a maddenedhelicopter blade.

I knew my end had come - but somehow The Almightywas with me on that terrible day. Realising the aircraftpossibly was in an inverted spin, as I was thrown violentlyforward against my safety harness, I pulled the locking pin.Somehow I was thrown out, but having forgotten in the heatof the moment to undo both my oxygen tube and my radioplug, I nearly got hanged as my helmet tore off my head Itgave me a severe neck pain for two days.

When I suddenly realised I had baled-out safely withoutbeing hit by any part of the aircraft, especially the high tail, Ilay on my back with my legs and arms spread-eagled,free-falling through very wet and cold cloud, calling thecontroller at Culdrose ... 'CuJdrose Two Two Zero, give mea steer' ... It then dawned on my befuddled mind that I hadno helmet and was facing a most terrible death on hittingEarth or Sea, so my reflexes called on me to pull myparachute release handle On first trying, it refused tobudge, being badly misshapen, but survival strength isfantastic and I gave it a terrific heave and as it pulled out somy chute opened with another crack. I swung there full ofjoy and wonder, thanking The Almighty for deliverance asI thought.

I must have been shot out of the aircraft at about 15,000feet, whilst my chute opened at possibly 8-9,000 feet.Eventually I broke cloud at about 400 feet, sighting a ragingsea below me high waves and poor visibility. Somehowremembering what I had learned about parachute pull-off inearlier years on a training course I had attended, I turned toface into wind and at the same time hit the 'oggin'. I wentunder, and as I surfaced again saw that my still openparachute was going to take me a fast surfing ride. It did. Ithen tried to use the parachute harness quick release box,but it was bent and refused to budge. 'So not liking the lookof the ocean, the waves were far from fiddling and small', tomisquote an oldie record by Stanley Holloway, I tried to getone arm out of the shoulder strap. When after a furiousstruggle and having swallowed far too much salt water Isucceeded, I was able to get my other arm out. With thechute only partially collapsed and my legs still in the harnessI went for a rapid surf ride on my back. Somehow I got mylegs out and then pulled my Mae West gas bottle cord.Nothing happened, so I tried my dinghy cord only to find ithas been cut during the bail-out. What no dinghy?

Luckily I was a strong swimmer in those days, and Idecided to tread water until I recovered some strength, butbefore I could do so I heard an engine thumping and at thesame moment was hooked through my Mae West vest at theback by an enormous hook. This lifted me out of the waterknocking me against a ship's wooden rail and deposited mestraight into a fish cleaning tank. I threw up.

Eric Sharp ended his career as a Fligh Sergeantwith he Ba tie of Britain Memorial Flight:

I was posted to Cranwell in 1951, af er passing out atHalton, first employed on R & I (Repair and Inspection FlIght),a name which gave way to ASF (Aircraft Servicing Flight) inthe mid-fifties and is used to his day. There I was set to workwith an 'aged' Corporal Fitter, who sported wartime medalribbons, completing an engine change on a Prentice. I don'tremember much about it. apart from being completelyoverawed at he world of real Airmen, Air Force andaeroplanes after the sheltered if rough life as an apprentice.

I the hangar was the station's one and only jet-enginedaircraft, a Meteor T.7, WA619, which had been on aninspection for some time. Very few aIrmen a that time knewanything about the 'modern airplane' and I, full of bullshltand brimming with recently acquired knowledge (but noexperience), was set to finish off the engine side of theinspection. I remember finding the fuel filter elements in thedrip trays among the old lock wire cuttings and paraffin­soaked sawdust. After asking Chiefy to order replacements Iexplained the procedure I had been taught for replacingthese items, and the technical workings of the half ball valvesin the Lucas fuel pump governor to which the merest speckof dust or obstruction was death.

Of course the inspection came to an end and 0

replacement filters were in SIght Sticking to my guns, Irefused to proceed any f ther, treating the sugges ion that Iput back the old ones with scorn. To my horror, the Chiefover-rode my juvenile and bum-fluff protests, retneved theeleme ts from where they still lay among the rubbish, gavethem a quick rinse in a bucket of fuel, clapped them backinto the bowls and bolted them on - where they flewperfectly, confounding my trained but immature technicalsoul l

lt wasn't only the engine trade that lacked knowledge ofthe then high tech aeroplane, for on the post inspection testflight the pilot repor ed it flying a little one wing down Amost experienced Corporal Rigger, armed with a couple ofspanners, went out on the line and gave it the aileron rimadjustment that years of working on Harvards and the likewas judged about nght. On take off the kite was noted to do avery swift and erra IC circuit and landing and, after taxiingin, a very white-faced test pilot emerged, who when calmeddown explained he had shot the circuit practically sittingsideways with one elbow braced on the cockpit wall in aneffort to hold the stick central to stop a very high roll rate

On reading the APs, the riggers found that Meteoraileron trim is adjusted with a jig incorporating a degreeplate, and adjustmen s made only a fraction of a turn at atime. Anyway I found myself posted with the eteor to HQFlight, I suspect as much to get rid of me as the aeroplane.

Regarding servicing generally, odd thIngs tend to sllckin one's mind. For instance Meteor engine cowlings had

whIle carryIng out his cockpit checks after start up on theline. The main legs did not retract because the brakes wereon, and the fnctlOn and weight on the wheels prevented it.

The worst task on the line for the rigger was to clean thewindows, for the T.7 had lots of them, some being ratherawkward to polish. There were twelve on the canopy, and afurther four in the port sidelight.

•~-.I'.ir

Facing page:Gloster Meteor T7 aerobatic team from the College ofAir Warfare at Manby in 1963, ShOWing to good effecttheir 180 imp gal ventral drop tanks.

(via Ray Hanna)

WorkIng on the Me eor T 7 was a pleasure. There were veryfew compone ts tha ould be even remotely regarded asInaccessIble, other han some oxygen bottles These wereset to starboard and below the cockpit floor line, and tochange them I had 0 tIe on my spectacles and work hangingupsIde down. But then airframe tradesmen didn't meddlewith oxygen systems before 1965, when the instrument traderelinquished their responsibility and oxygen systemsbecame ours. The undercarriage, while having a rathernovel shortening facility when retracting, was in all otherrespects a model of sturdy simplicity. lts levered or 'trailingarm' legs were capable of absorbing enormous thumpingarnvals wIthout damage. The wheels brakes were adequatebut, being drum- ype pneumatic units, rather prone tooverheatIng if used 00 vigorously, even while taxiing,especially in hot weather The advantage the occupan s of aT 7 had during such weather was the ability to open thecanopy whilst taxiing, so the crew could remain cool whilstthe brakes got frazzled

A hazard for the unwary ground crewman wanderingabout atop the inner mainplanes was that someone in thecockpit might select the airbrakes open. With no pressureremaining in the accumulators, the airbrakes would have tobe pumped open using the handpump, which was located inthe forward cockpit Should there be pressure in theaccumula ors (or he port engine running), however, thealrbrakes would slam open, which could launch anyonestandIng on them clear of the wi g A similar hazard existedbeneath the ings, where he other set could dent an unwaryhead

On the port side of the cockpit coaming, beside the fronseat, was a little trigger at the end of a Bowden cable. Paintedblack and yellow in stripes, this was the undercarriageoverride which enabled the undercarriage to be retracted'with weight on'. This would drop the aircraft on its belly ndslow its progress in the event that the brakes should fall onthe landing run. Unless this rigger had a 'tell tale' wire toindicate it had been opera ed, it could be opera ed andreturned to the off posItion and no-one would be the wiserunless they inadvertently selec ed undercarriage up whilehe aircraft was on the ground. The mechanism could only bereset by going 0 the selector located in the fuselage behindthe cockpit, and pulling back on the cable to engage a latch(ensuring that the trigger in the cockpit was set to theoff/normal position). This little conundrum caught out at leastone pilot at Chivenor, who dropped a Meteor on its nose

used to be shut down and only restarted to taxi In oneusually managed to turn off he runway beforehand

I note that I gave Norman Tebbitt an instrument ratIngtest on 15 August 1954 ..

A groundcrew point of view is given by JohnNorris, who helped service them as a rigger atChivenor:

.·..t-·itdozens of screws - I actually bought a Stanley YankeeScrewdriver to do the job, years before they were everissued. Getting into the early small engine intakes wasdifficult, especially if wearing the awful kerosine suit, tocheck the gear box oil level during Before-Oight Inspections.In those early days of Jet aeroplanes, kerosine (later Avtur)was for some reason considered lethal, or likely to stunt yourgrowth or something, and the answer was thought to be thisone-piece rubber overall tightly fastened all round togetherwith short rubber lace-up boots, for all who worked on orrefuelled jet planes. They were dreadful things; the nearestI've had to endure since was the immersion suit, but formuch better reasons

James McNamara worked on Meteor T.7 engines

On a Middle East Air Force squadron of which I was amember, we had three T.7s. These were coded V, Wand X­known as the Venerable Virgin, Weary Willie and Xenon

The T.7 was not the easiest of aircraft to work on, butvery much the state of the Art in the fifties. Getting the twoseats in or out was quite tricky, and smallish people (likemyselD were 'volunteered' for this job. Loose-article checkswere frequently carried out, and if someone announced theyhad lost a pencil, it was a major operation to find it. Theowner was fined a nominal sum and the proceeds went to theSquadron Party Fund, the idea being that we tried to have nomoney in the kitty at the end of the year.

As the aircraft were used for communications andcontinuation training, we had many Senior Officers Oyingthem, and it was quite something to present the Fine Bookand Money Box to a Group Captain. I remember

approaching one somewhat fearsome character with morethan a little trepidation, and asked him for five bob. Heconsidered this for a moment, then said "As a Scot, I'd like topoint out that it wasn't a new pencil, so 4j6d should cover it"lShared humour of this sort usually led to firm friendships, aswas the case in this instance.

Much later, at an Open Day in the UK, I was looking aftera T.7 and trying to answer the usual 'Joe Public' questions.How fast can it go? How much petrol can it carry? - and thereally curly ones like, how many miles per gallon? The onesto be careful of were the ATC, who would want a quickanswer to things like - 'What is the efficiency of the Derwentcompressor over a range of RPM and altitude - density andso on? The standard answers to these questions was 'Sorry,that's classified'.

Anyway, towards the end of a tiring day, I was on aramp-like stand, showing people the cockpit, when acommotion broke out. A small boy had decided to count theturbine blades in the starboard engine, and had managed toget himself impaled on the thermocouple probes. Theensuing noise was tremendous. However, I managed to getthe very sooty and frightened blighter out of there. Hisparents immediately wanted to know who to sue, and what Iwould have done if I couldn't get him out. I resisted the urgeto suggest I might have hit the starter I Anyway, we had himcleaned up and ice-creamed, and sat him up front for a fewminutes.

For ages afterwards, I dreamed of being hung from theAir Ministry yard-arm - with full military honours. Even now,when Isee a 'Meatbox', I always check the starboard tailpipefor wildly Oailing grey-socked little legs l

A t the end of the Second World War, the RAFhad a need for a medium-sized crew trainer, arole performed for much of the war by

surplus Wellington bombers of various marks. From1946, numbers of Wellington Xs were converted by

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

Boulton Paul specifically as navigator trainers, the noseturrets being replaced by a streamlined fairing. In thisguise they became the Wellington T. la, although thestyle Wellington T.19 was also considered for a time.They were a useful expedient but, not being

SpecificationTwo 1,950 hp Enstol Hercules 264.Span 95 It 7In, length 67 It 6 In, height 23 It 11 In,WIng area 974 sq It.Empty 27,040 lb, loaded 37,500 lb.MaXImum speed 288 mph at 10,000 It, CrUiSIng speed239 mph, Initial climb 1,400 It/min, range 2,648 mIles.

• ; f "'--1;'. •specifically designed for their task, they had manyshortcomings, especially in the potential for aninstructor to rescue a pupil from some of his worstmistakes.

These aircraft were only regarded as a stop-gap,and Operational Requirement number OR.249 wasaccordingly issued for a new post-war design. In themeantime the Vickers company had produced theViking civil transport, and its military counterpart theValetta, and therefore a logical next step was aderivative to meet the new requirement. SpecificationT. 13/48 was issued on 20 September 1948, and Vickerswere authorised to proceed with their Valettaclassroom-type trainer, later to be named the Varsity,thus maintaining the tradition of academic names forRAF trainers.

The prototype (VX828) first flew on 17 July 1949,fitted with a tricycle undercarriage, which would bemore appropriate for training pilots to take off and landpost-war types of aircraft. Accommodating the steer­able nosewheel entailed the addition of nearly five feetto the length, and the wingspan was also increased bysix feet. A pannier, fitted under the centre fuselagesection, incorporated a bomb-aiming position forwardand stowage aft for twenty four 25-lb practise bombs inrows of six. A stowage rack had provision for remoteequipment enabling the operation of Rebecca, radiocompass, H2S, API, GPI and intercom.

The Varsity had a basic crew of three, comprisingfirst pilot, second pilot/navigator and wireless oper­ator, with six trainee stations. It could therefore train allcrew members simultaneously. In the nose were thepilot-instructor and trainee separated by a pedestal,each having complete dual-flying controls, a bigimprovement over the Wellington T.I0. Behind thesewere fitted side-by-side rearward facing seats for thewireless operators. Next came the bomb-aimingpannier, with provision for instructor and trainee, andhaving a mattress on which the pupil could lie prone.Aft of this came a station for an instructor and twonavigator pupils. An astrodome in the roof wasadjustable in height for use as a sighting platform.

Tests at Boscombe Down on the second prototype(VX835) included a trip to Khartoum, primarily toassess oil cooling and tropical suitability. The 60 hoursflying involved in this exercise, including stagingflights, also afforded an opportunity to obtain crewreports on the layout of the aircraft. There were anumber of minor criticisms of detail, but in general thelayout of equipment in both the cockpit and the cabinwas well liked. Long cross-country flights were madeby a single pilot, both by day and at night, and in agreat variety of weather conditions, and none of theseproved either difficult or tiring.

An initial order was placed for 60 machines, andRAF production eventually totalled 160. The firstproduction machine (WF324) flew on 21 May 1951, and

deliveries commenced on 1 October. 1951 to No 201Advanced Flying School at Swinderby, where by thefollowing March it had completely replaced theWellington T.IO. At that time newly-winged traineepilots came straight from single-engined Harvards or insome instances Balliols, to be taught the intricacies offlying twin-engined piston aircraft. They also learntsuch skills as taxiing, asymmetric flight, single-enginedovershoots and critical speeds and landings. The two2,100 bhp Bristol Hercules engines gave ample power,and could easily cope with a single-engined baulkedlanding, even with a full load of trainees. Despite thebig increase in aircraft size, it was found that it tookonly four hours to convert a pilot from dual to soloflying, though the ten-week course included a furthernine hours of exercises.

The Varsity was gradually introduced into anumber of units of Flying Training Command, givingadvanced instruction to Pilots, Navigators and Bomb­Aimers, in addition to being used for signals training.Its range enabled it to undertake long-distance trainingflights, sometimes as far afield as North Africa. It alsoparticipated in annual air defence exercises, in which ittook the part of an enemy bomber. Navigator trainingwas given on Varsities at 0 1 Air avigation School atTopcliffe (later Stradishall) and 2 ANS at Thomey Island(later Hullavington then Gaydon), the task being takenover by 6 FTS at Finningley in 1960.

From August 1960, 4 FTS at Valley had a smallnumber of Varsities for training Jet Provost-trainedpilots destined for large propeller-driven aircraft, suchas the Shackleton and Britannia. This function wastransferred to 5 FTS at Oakington two years later. TheVarsity was withdrawn from service in 1976.

Gordon Hodkinson had his first experience of theVarsity at the Bomber Command Bombing School atLindholme in December 1953:

I was Oying the Lincoln and converted locally to the Varsity,both aircraft being used for training bomb aimers. TheVarsity was _a tolerant aircraft, and ideal for pilotmulti-engine conversion and navigation/bombing training.After the Lincoln, which was a bit difficult to enter (over themain spar or up a tall ladder), and which needed a fairamount of attention to produce a reasonable landing, theVarsity was a joy. A gentleman's aircraft, easy to enter, witha comfortable roomy cockpit, it was straightforward tohandle in the air and, with the tricycle gear (my first), easy toland and taxi.

At Lindholme we Oew student navigators who dropped24 practise bombs per Oight from a height of 4,000 to 8,000feet. The aircraft was very manoeuvrable when required,and a good bombing platform when straight and level. Up at20,000 feet for high-level bombing, on oxygen and with theengines in'S' gear, performance was still good but not socomfortable, being unpressurised and decidedly cold inwinter. I seem to remember 'changing gear' in the climb - atabout 12,000 feet the boost started to drop so we levelled off,throttled back to zero boost, selected'S' gear, opened the

throttles and continued the climb.The bomb-aimer's position provided a marvellous view,

but was not supposed to be occupied during landing, beingabout 18 inches above the runway. People would try it, ofcourse, and get quite a shock the first time

The single-engine performance was good provided thespeed was 115 knots or above. It was a knee-tremblingexercise keeping straight with rudder against full power onone engine, and trying to hold climbing speed of 115 knotsThings became a little easier at circuit speed.

A memorable demonstration of controllability was theglide landing from 1,000 feet. One turned finals level at 1,000feet, waited until the runway disappeared under the nose,then throttled back to idle, selected Full Flap and pushed thenose down to about 30 degrees (it seemed vertical) to hold130 knots. It worked a treat providing one rounded out intime l Most people tended to round out early and had to easeon a bit of power.

The short take-off was impressive. Select full Oap,throttles to full power on the brakes. brake off, lift off at 80knots after a very short run, then Oy level above the runway,accelerating to 115 knots, then climb.

The Hercules engines were powerful and dependable.They certainly took quite a lot of 'hammer' withoutcomplaining, in the pilot conversion role. They neversounded happy when idling on the ground though, clankinglike an old steam engine - something to do with the sleevevalve, perhaps. I only remember one case of engine failure(loss of oil pressure) during my time. One design fault wasputting both Idle Cut-off switches side by side on a panelabove the pilot. Incidents occurred in training when thewrong ICO was switched off and caused a Ourry of hands inthe cockpit to sort things out. A guard was later fittedbetween the switches to reduce the possibility of error.

The anti-icing system worked well to keep the wmgsclear, but the engine intake guards used gradually to ice upuntil completely covered. Then a Oap automatically openedto allow hot air to be drawn from behind the engine. This hotair could also be selected if required, but this resulted in aloss of power, so engine speed had to be increased to

Vickers Varsity Tl W]939 '0' of No 201 AdvancedFlying School based at Swinderby in 1953

(Author)

maintain height and speed. This happened to me once in theBerlin Corridor at a medium level, but fortunately we wereable to maintain our level and the engines accepted theincreased fuel consumption. Generally though, icing neverseemed a great problem.

The aircraft was roomy, and would carry a fair load, butcare was needed to balance the load to prevent the tailsitting on the ground l A metal rod was supplied to be hungunder the rear fuselage whilst loading, to prevent such athing happening, and it was needed once when picking up aSea King engine from St Athan. There was no problemloading this item, but it was heavy and aft of the main spar,putting the rod under compression. We moved all theparachutes and everything loose forward of the spar, andtwo of us sat in the front whilst the third crew memberremoved the rod (now free) and came up front with us. Thebalance must have been right because she Oew weIll

Squadron Leader Dick Smerdon recalls:

When I took command of the Home Ferry Squadron in 1956,my taxis were three Ansons and two Varsities. Ispent most ofmy time ferrying aircraft ranging from Oxfords to Spitfires,and from Hunters to Javelins, leaving the taxiwork to thosequalified to do so. However, I had a few dual sorties in theVarsities. I liked the tricycle undercarriage, and thepower-weight ratio seemed such that the performance wasimpressive. I recall viewing through the bomb-aimer'swindow the nosewheel during the exit from the landingrunway on to the taxiway, and being surprised to see howmuch the nosewheel hub and axle could move from theposition of the centre of the tyre in contact with the ground.

Warrant Officer Paddy Porter worked on Varsitiesfor a period of over six years early in his career, both

1'"" or oJln ,~ _

,l:.

new colour scheme Sliver overall With 'dayglo nose, fm andwmg tips

As a navIgation trainer, the VafSlty was fairly wellequipped, being fitted WIth the followmg items twolO-channel VHF transml ter receIvers, TR.1985 a d 1987;operated by the pilots via mdependent control umts, fitted mthe centre of the COCkPIt, above the mstrument panel; oneHigh Frequency/Medium Frequency (HF/MF) transmitter andreceiver Type Tx 1154 Rx 1155, with ItS associated powerum s, Pu 33B/Pu 35A, hiS was operated by the Air Signaller,for vOIce or morse commumcatlOn; wo mtercom systems,one for crew and one for students each havmg ItS own AIl34amplifier, Pu 173 vibrator pack and 2 volt accumulator; Oneradio compass mstallatlOn WIth a remote control umt at thenavIgator's posItion One Gee II navigation radar, oneRebecca kIV radar (Eureka hommg, BABS approach), and aSperry G4B gyro compass were also fitted at the navigator'sposltlOn

A remote radio compass bearing mdicator and G4Bmdlcator were fitted mto the plIo s mstrument panel Oneastro compass WhICh, when needed by the naVIgators, couldbe removed from ItS storage bracket and fi ted into theperspex astrodome. One type P12 compass fitted in the roofof the cockpit above the pilots One drift SIght was fitted on aspeCIal mountmg, on the port SIde of the fuselage betweenthe mam entrance door and navigator s posltlOn One AldISslgnallmg lamp WIth clear, red and green glasses wasstowed at the signaller's position, and when required a MarkIX bubble sextant was carned by the navIgators Some yearslater the VarsIties were completely updated with modernWIreless and radar eqUIpment

The VarsIty carned a selection of dIfferent types of radlOaerials, each being coupled to a specific equipment TheVHF, radio compass sense and Gee II aenals were solidwhIp types, SImIlar 0 those used on cars The Rebecca IVhad blade aenals fitted each SIde of the nose, just below theCOCkpIt and on both outer wing tips. The radlO compassrotating-loop aerial was mounted in a loop housing on thetop centre-line of the fuselage aft of the astrodome Therewere two HF/ F s ainless steel wire aenals, one bemg fixedlike a clothes Ime from the top of a mast, WhICh was mountedon the fuselage above the SIgnaller's position, to a tenslOnedinsulator at the top of the fin. The other was a trailing aerialwhIch comprised a reel of WIre termmated at the free endWIth a stnng of lead ball weights. The reel was fItted on 0 aratchet assembly at the side of the SIgnaller's pOSItion, andwhen required he would reel it out through a fixed tubewhich protruded below the lower fuselage on the starboardside of the aircraft It was not uncommon for a traIling aenalo be los dunng flIght or for it to part company WIth heaircraft on landing if the SIgnaller had forgotten to reel It in. Itwas a wireless man's job in ASF to make up trailing aerialsand one's fingers could become quite sore splicing the steelwIre To ensure the correct length you had WIre stretchednght down he hangar, one hell of a job because i if kmkedyou had to start again.

I think it was about 1957-58 that the new type blue clothflying helmet entered service as a replacemernt for theWWIl leather ype A bone dome fitted over the top forprote tlon ThIS new helme also introduced a smaller mlc,telplug and socket, plus the mic/tellead which plugged mto theaircraft was quite short, being tailor-made for ejector seatsTo overcome this problem in the Varsity and Valetta, I was

., 'Ill \; .~-...':; ;

a firs -line servicmg on he squadron and second-lineservicing in Aircraft Servicing Flight (ASF). Aftercompletmg 18 months' boy entrant raining as an AirWireless Mechanic, bu still being five man hs tooyoung for Man's Service, his first posting in March 1956was to No 2 A S at Thomey Island:

(MAP photo)

away the Varsity had been jacked up as par of theinspection routme. I eventually climbed up a set of stepladders near a wing tip and walked right along the wing,over the engme to the fuselage, studded boots and all oneof the emergency windows were out. but he astrodomeblls er on top of the fuselage had been removed Yes, Iclambered up the sIde of the fuselage and m through theastra hatch. The sound of my boots was heard throughout themtenor of the aIrcraft, and that afternoon I got my first pair ofRAF shoes af er a short lesson in he English language fromhe Hangar Flight Sergeant'

From the groundcrew pomt of view the Varsity was agood aIrcraft to work m. There was plenty of room, with easyaccess for most jobs, even to the Hercules engines, whosecowlings unfolded and hinged backwards Entry 0 theaircraft was hrough a door just aft of the trailing edge on theport side of the fuselage. A metal ladder, which could befolded in half for stowage, was carried in the rear of theaircraft when flying.

Originally the RAF trammg Varsl les carried yellowbands around he rear fuselage and on both wings, but thIswas changed when 'dayglo' was introduced. I thmk it wasaround 1959 60 that the first 2 ANS Varsity appeared in the

Vickers Varsity Tl WL638 'V' of the Bomber CommandBombing School at Lindholme lfl 1963.

On arrival at Thomey I was posted to the RadlO ServicingFlight (RSF), but was qUIckly moved mto the ASF to help outI was so keen that I hadn't even changed a pair of mystudded boots for shoes (ex-Boy Entrants were not issuedWIth shoes until they arrived at their first unit) I soon latchedon 0 a ational Service mechanic who was carrying out anmspec lOn on a Varsity, but as I was under age I couldn't sIgnfor any work tha I completed I spent the first couple ofweeks fetchmg, carrymg and generally learning the ropes.On my first day m ASF I was helping this lad to do hismspectlon, a d he sent me to get a ool, but m the meantImesomeone had moved the access ladder to the entry door; sowhen I returned I couldn't get back m. Whlle I had been

Vickers Varsity Tl Wj945 'H' of 0 115 Squadron, RAFSignals Command, based at Tangmere in 1961.

(MAP photo)

Vickers Varsity Tl Wj608 'ME' of the Central FlyingSchool at Little Rissington in 1960.

(MAP photo)

I

H

<'0'7/u 0 U

caught you. though, It normally mean an ear-bendmgA before and after fligh mspection also mcluded a

phySical check of all the aenals The whip aerials were ixedngidly to mounting plates in the roof of the aircraft and theywere poked out through rubber grommets When a pilotreported one of the VHF sets unserviceable with no transmitor receive, especially in very cold weather, investigationwould often find an aerial missing. Vibration during flightcould cause hairline cracks at the base of the aeri I rods,mOlsture would hen seep mand freeze, causmg he aerial tobreak off Ul e often he aenal would just be lying on top ofhe fuselage sllll at ached to the rubber grommet

The HFI F mast and loop aenal were also affec ed bywater, and m ex remely wet weather, especially whenaircraft were parked in he open for any length of time,water would seep into both. As the aIrcraft climbed or divedthe mast aerial had a nasty habit of drenching the signaller.Water in the loop erial would often drip through the drivetube into the base of the loop drive unit, just above thenavigators. lt was quite common to look through the smallwindow at the desyn indIcator, to check a reading, and seeIt Immersed in water

One of the mam problems with the in ercom system inthe early days (I believe 11 was modified with two A1961amplifiers with theIr own mternal mo or generators around1959 1960) was a loud whistle, which normally ha pened atstar of flying m the morning, shortly after a crew hadclimbed on board and plugged themselves in. The heatersfor the valves in the A 1134 intercom amplifier worked off2 volt accumulators, and when these ran down, low voltagecaused the system to go ape. The intercom system wasgreatly Improved after the 1961 Amps were fitted

When an aircraft landed, especially at night after anavigation exercise, there was a distinctive smell inside amixture of stale oxygen, chewing gum, hydraulic 011, rubberand warm radio equipment. We usually waited for all thecrew to depart before we climbed on board to commenceour checks, unless i was pouring with rain. Then we wouldget inside and stand at the back out of the way. As soon asthe crew had left, we would rummage through the discardedflying ration boxes, hoping to find the odd Mars bar orpacket of chewing gum. The student navig tors werefavourite, because they had to work hard during the flightand didn't get much time to eat their rations

I sometimes had a funny feeling when I climbed into aVarsity or Valet a at night by myself, especially if it wasshortly after the aircraf had landed The creakmg andspluttering from the engines as they cooled down alwaysseemed tha much louder. If I was clearing a radio fault, Iwould soon be m a world of my own, headset on and voicesor music in. the earphones. About 1957 we had a newlypromoted WIreless Corporal posted m. Ican't remember hisname, but Idid work with him for quite a spell before he wasdischarged. He came to us from the Far East, I believe, andwas recovering from a nervous breakdown. His brother hadbeen an air signaller and had been killed in a Valetta crashsomewhere in Malaya. This lad was servicing radio sets inhis section one day, when he suddenly thought he heard hisbrother's voice screaming at him. Evidently he went berserkand smashed the place up,nclud ng the radios. He told meabou it several times when we were working together, andas I was quite young at the time I suppose it had an effect onme for a while

the pIlot pulled us out and regamed control I shall neverknow, but he did. I thmk we were at about 6-8,000 feet at thetime. The problem was caused by a flap either jamming orhaving been set incorrectly, which caused it to act like anaileron, i.e one flap was fully down and the other jammed upor only parllally down As I was qUlte young at the time itwas just a bit of excItement, but If it happened to me now, I'msure I would have to change my underpants l

The rear crew seats, compnsmg two sIgnallers, ones reen navigator, two student navIgators and any spare seatsthat were fitted down the back, all faced rearwards.Consequently, there was a tendency to leave your seat andgo and stand behmd the pilots to see out front. In thISposition, however, you were standmg on the escape hatch.In an emergency the front crew could lift open this hatch andvacate the aircraft. I believe it folded in half, hinged alongthe middle, and, when activated, a door on the outer skinwould swing inwards making a kind of slide. I remember onone test flight we had a navigator on board and he told mealways to be careful when standmg behmd the pilots,because he had seen the emergency hatch open by itself acouple of times. Unfortunately, thIS same navigator died m aVarsIty crash a few weeks later I was a trumpeter m theThomey Island band at the time, and I played the Last Postand Reveille at his funeral. The Varsl y was on a navex, andcrashed somewhere m the north of England killing all thecrew.

Work on the squadron flight line consisted mainly ofcarrying out routine servicings, such as before flight, afterflight and turn round inspections; plus the rectificallon of anyfaults that occurred Until about 1960, a pre-flight inspectionfor a wireless man included a functional check of all VHFchannels except the two tuned to the distress frequencyEvery radio man had his own call sIgn, and nine channels oneach set were checked against a standby radlO ng whichwas mstalled in the RSF If you were the only wIreless man onearly shift, and ten plus aircraft had to be prepared for flight,you really had your work cut ou trymg to get them ready.

You were supposed to have a 24 volt trolley accumulatorplugged into the aircraft before you switched on any radioequipment, but there were never enough trolley-accs to goround In these circumstances you were expected to pushtrolley-accs between aircraft as they were needed. ThisdIdn't work very well because the vanous trades, especiallyIf faults cropped up, required power for different lengths ofIlme One short cut was to SWI ch the ancraft ground-flightsWitch to the flight posItion and then carry out your checksqUlckly using the aircraft's batteries If the electricIans

(Map photo)

(Paddy Porter collection)

Vickers Varsity T 1 WF371 '5' of No 5 Flying TrainingSchool at Oakington in 1973.

the aircraft buffeted and began to drop ItS nose mas all; hewould then catch It just m time WI h the throttles and allwould be normal again A clean stall IS one with wheels andflaps up, and a dirty stall IS one wi h them down On oneparllcular Ight, I was SIt mg next 0 the radar mechanic Thepilot had just called over the intercom 'I am throttli g backfor a dirty stall'. I think everyone was a little tense on theseoccasions, even if you had done many such trips before Justas the Varsity was about to drop its nose, it suddenly flippedover, almost on its back. I remember seeing the radarmechanics' watch, which he had on the desk to timesomething, plus several parachu es, floating in the air. How

Vickers Varsity T 1 W]945 of No 5 Flying TrainingSchool at Oakington.

one of a two-man earn tasked wi h fit m the first triali s allation of long ex ens on leads These mated with thenew helmets, to every intercom position throughout theaircraft, and could be stowed away when not in use.Eventually pigtail adaptors were introduced as part of theaircrew's flying kit.

One other trial modification Idid while in ASF was to fit asecond radio compass control unit into the cockpit roofbe ween he two pilots. This enabled the pilots to une intohoming beacons instead of having to rely on the navigatorsSeveral tnal Ights were carned out, but for some reasonthiS modlficatlOn was never accepted, and I had to removeall he extra kit. I never did find out why

In those days, when an alrcraf had been through anmspection in ASF, i was an unwritten rule that members ofthe servicing team would fly on the Air Test, and I have 27Varsity flights recorded in my log book. A flight test crewwould consist of a pilot and co-pilot, the remainder of thecrew being made up of several mechanics and fitters,usually of corporal rank and below, from the various radeswhich had eqUlpmen to check or set up during the ight.The co-pIlot, if not another pilot, would usually be an AirSignaller, nd I seem to remember that the majority of AIrSignallers a Thomey were trained to take off and land, andmany ew (egularly as co-pilots

The first thing you did when you knew you were goingon an air test was to visit the safety equipment section andbook out a parachute, harness and ae West. A flight testnormally lasted about 50 minutes, and during this time lots ofindividual checks were carried out I used to test the T.1154R1155, but I never did risk letting the training aerial out.Then I would move down the back to the navigator'sposition, nex to he radar man who would be running bothradars, and tes the radio compass. The electncian wouldcheck and monitor various voltages with an avometer andadjust regulators etc When the pilot was satisfied that all waswell, both up front and in the back, he would order everyoneo strap in, in preparation for clean and dirty stalls.

For this, the pilot would throttle back the engines until

••..t-••

Towards the end of heIr course, student avigatorswould be let loose on an overseas navIgation exefClse,usually to Gibraltar Normally four to six aircraft would makethe rip, leaving on a Thursday or Friday and returmng ont e followmg onday Ground crew would be selected fromvolunteers, and a senior non-commissioned officer (S CO)wIth authority to oversign all trades would be in charge. Therest of the team would be made up of corporals and belowEverybody, air and ground crew, would attend the flightbnefings so we all knew what was going on Two or three ofus would fly as supernumary crew in each aircraft anddistribute rations and coffee during flight.

On one of these trips, in WL683 '0', we headed into b dweather over the Bay of BIscay, so the other mechanic and Iwent down to he ba k of the aIrcraft Usmg our parachutesas pillows, we stretched out on the floor between the extraseats and aircraft spares, then both fell into an unintendeddeep sleep. Some time later the crew decided they wouldlike some coffee so the pilot called over the intercom,'Coffee lads' - no response How about some coffee' stillno response. The VafSlty was not pressunsed, so If It wentabove 10,000 feet the crew plugged into oxygen. Unknownto us, the pilot had climbed way above this to get out of thebad wea her, but no one had thought to tell us to put oxygenmas s on By now the pilot had descended to the normaloperating altitude, and he was puzzled when neIther of usanswered him over the intercom A dig m the ribs and awhiff of oxygen soon brought us round, however, then aftera bit of leg pullmg from the crew we dished out the coffee

This was quite an eventful trip, because as weapproached GIbraltar all the wireless equipment startedpacking up, even the intercom. When the crew realised Iwas a wireless man they gave me a free hand to try to getsomething working. The trouble was, the screen navIgatoron thIS tnp was the Wmg Commander in charge of navIgatortrainmg, and he became rather interested in what I wasdoing, watching closely every move I made. All the majoritems of wireless and radar gear were easily accessible, theVHF sets were moun ed in trays in a crate be ween the mainspar and he SIgnaller's position on the starboard SIdeAccess to the bomb aimer's positIon was vIa two doorspositioned in the centre of the floor, in line with the radiocrate The Varsity floor was soon like a radio workshop, Ihad covers off the sets swapping valves and crystals,tweeking variable resistors etc, but all in vam. I even had ago at fixing the Tx1l54 and Rx1155, but that would not work

eItherEventually I got all the kit back together, and asked the

pilot to try to contact Gibraltar 0 joy at all, we couldn'teven contact the other aircraft in front and behind us At thispoint we were ge ing dangerously close to Gibraltar, andespecially Spain The Wing Commander, realising I wasn'tgetting anywhere, decided to leave me and go up front toconsult with the pilot. I think they had decided to flyoverhead and waggle the wings, which was the usual 'NORADIO' ident By this time I had used up all my specialvocabulary, and as no one was watchmg, I deCIded to ventmy frustration by giving the radio crate the boot treatmentwhereupon both VHF sets started working, I couldn't believeit, and he crew thought I was ace l

At Thorney, 24 volt trolley-accs were normally used toprovide power to the aIrcraft for ground servIcing purposes,but overseas it was more common to use petrol electric sets,whose power leads terminated in a standard ATO plug.This meant we had to use a special adaptor which wasplugged mto he VarsIty socket, loca ed on the starboardside of the nose under a small hinged flap, to enable us to geta 24 volt supply. Everything went fine on engme start, untilthe pilot signalled - remove external power If you were notextremely careful. the power lead would pull out of theadaptor and leave It plugged mto the 24 volt socket Thishappened 0 us as we were preparmg to leave Gibraltar Asthe lead pulled away, the flap sprang down and shorted outon the large brass pins that were left protruding from therubber adaptor The length of fine rod down the centre ofhe hinge glowed, sparkled and hen melted, allowing thesmall flap to fall on the deck. Luckily no serious damage wasdone, and it didn't delay us from leaving Gibraltar

On the way back to the UK, I spent the first part of theflIght down in the bomb aimer's position, then when itbecame too dark 0 see anythi g I deCIded to return to myseat. I had just got back into the main cabm and was closingthe bomb aimer's entrance doors when the co-pilot tappedme on the shoulder He asked me if I would sit in his seat andact as co-pilot for a couple 0 hours. I think he had had agood time in GIbraltar The pilot briefed me on he maininstruments and controls, but as the aircraft was being flownon George (automatic pilot) I didn't have much to do really. Iremember seeing the Channel Islands in the moonlight,10,000 feet or so below us, and the shimmer on the sea andthe beams from a lighthouse a truly beautiful sight.

cdJ® [)=D@wo ~ ~@mJcdJ ~@MU[J@OmJ®[J

Power plant:Dimenisons:

Weights:Performance:

SpecificationOne 3,500 lb de HaVilland Goblin 35.Span 38 ft 0 in, length 34 ft 61/2 in, height 6 It 2 in,wing area 261 sq ft.Empty 7,380 lb, loaded 12,920 lb.Maximum speed 549 mph at 20.000 ft cruising speed403 mph, iniial climb 4.500 It/min, range 850 miles,endurance 2.3 hrs, service ceiling 40,000 ft.

• I; "'-.1'. • )1 ); F

The in roduc ion into service of he de HavillandVampire T.ll brought about a revolu ion in RAFflying training. For the first time pilots

were able to qualify on a jet aircraft.The prototype Vampire Trainer was a private

venture aircraft built by the Airspeed Division of deHavillands, who undertook he design and tooling atChristchurch. It was exhibited in the s atic park at the1950 Farnborough Show with he manu ac urers'marking G-5-7, and made is maiden fligh on 15

ovember 1950. De Havillands had already sol manyVampire fighters 0 overseas air forces, and saw amarket for a wo-sea er trainer version. The newconversion w s based on the Vampire FB.5 fighter­bomber, bu took advantage of he experience gainedin designing the Vampire NF.10 ni ht fighter. Thewings and tail booms of the Trainer were identical withthose of the FB.5 but it was fitted with a wide cockpit,which was s raigh forward and uncl ttered, withside-by-side sea ing, dual controls and dual ins rumen­tation. The cockpit canopy had a welded tuberamework, wi h a large single-piece optIcally correc

front screen flanked by two direct-vision panels.Altera ions were made to the tail surfaces to

compensate for the effects of the extended nose. Thede Havilland Goblin engine differed from that used inthe FB.5 only in having cabin pressure tapped from anengine compressor instead of needing a separate cabinsupercharger. Designed as an all-purpose trainer, themachine had he four 20 mm Hispano cannon of theFB.5, which enabled i to be used for gunneryins ruction a bo h high speed and high altitudes. Inaddi ion there was provision for two 1,000 b bombs oreight rocke s.

The Ministry of S pply, hen responsible foraircraft produc ion, ook an interest and SpecificationT.lll was issued, an order being placed on 5July 1951for wo pre-production machines, to be designated theVampire T.II. The first of these (WW458) flew on 1December 1951, but in the meantime there wassufficient confidence in the concep for two fullproduc ion orders 0 ailing 147 aircraft 0 be placed on3 Oc ober 1951, he firs ( Z414) being delivered inFebruary 1952. Further production was authorisedunder Specificaion T.I1IP on 17 April 1952, over 500being ultimately produced or he RAF. The Royal avyalso took an in erest, drawing up naval requirementNR/A36, leading to he Sea Vampire T.22 variant, ofwhich 72 were delivered under Specification T.IIIP2,issued on 28 May 1952.

Tests were carried out between February andApril 1952 on WW458, to establish its general suitabili yas a trainer, and to see if there was any notabledifference in i s handling charac eris ics comparedwith he priva e venture pro otype. It was found 0 havevery similar performance capabilities 0 hose ofcontemporary jet fighters and was pleasan to handle,

making I eminently sui able for both advanced andoperational raining, and likely 0 inspire confidence inthe pupil.

Spinning was rather unpleasant, but for anintermediate trainer this was not necessarily a

Top:An early production de HaVilland Vampire Tll WZ421of the Armament Practice Camp at Acklington in July1953.

(Sqn Ldr D. W Warne)

Bottom:De HaVilland Vampire Tll XD426 just off theproduction line in December 1953. This is a lateversion showing to good effect the dorsal anti-spinextension to the fins, and the one-piece canopy.

(Ministry of Supply)

drawback, as pupils would gain an early introduc ionto cIrcumstances similar to those they were soon toencoun er in current fighters There was now a sharpWIng drop at the stall, however, which, if uncured,would rule out its. use in that role, as trainee pilotswould have InsufficIent experience at that stage to copesafely. Further tests however, on the second produc­tion machine (WZ415), showed hat the problem hadalready been overcome by he manufac urers.. . The T.ll was very suitable for armamen raining,Is slde-by-slde seatIng beIng especially welcome asthe Instructor and pupil had similar sighting sys ems,whIch would be of considerable help in gun-firing,rocketry and bombing. Absence of ejector seats was amajor disadvantage, however, as was non-duplicationof the undercarriage lever, which could proveembarraSSIng on occasion. A minor fault was opticaldistortIon by the curved roof panels, which could leadto difficulties in the closing-in stages of formation flying.

The arrival of the Vampire T.ll in Flying TrainingCommand enabled the sequence of pilot training 0 beradically Improved. Hitherto pilots had received abinitio training on Provosts at a Flying Training School,then progressed to an Advanced Flying School for JettraInIng on Meteor T.7s before going on to OperationalConversion Units. With the arrival in 1953 of his newmachine at the FTSs, i became possible to completethe early stages of their training a the one unit.However, the change from the Pren ice/Harvard/Meteor sequence 0 he new Provost/Vampire se­quence added £10,000 0 the cos of training a pilot.

Initial deliveries of the Vampire T.Il were mainlyto AFSs, but these were gradually closed down andtheir function taken over by the FTSs, the first to do thisbeing 5 FTS at Oakington, whose first all-throughcourse commenced in May 1954. The syllabus for theVampire T.Il comprised 110 hours of training, whichIncluded dual flyIng instruction, instrument flying,aerobatIcs, navIgatIOn exerCises, forma ion drill andnight flying.

Later production batches of Vampire T.lls incor­pora ed a number of improvements recommendedaf er evalua ion at Boscombe Down. The earliermachines had some tendency towards rudder overba­lance, which was cured by limiting rudder travel, butthis in turn tended to impede recovery from a spin. Toovercome this, the fin surfaces were increased byfittIng dorsal famngs extending forward along the tailbooms. Visibility from the cockpit was also a problem,and interim modifica ions to the framed canopy werela er superseded by fitting a new moulded single-piececanopy. The safety aspec s were considerably en­hanced by the fi ting of Martin-Baker fully au oma iceJec or seats.

The aircraf was eventually phased out with thearrival on the scene of the Gnat, but by then more than3,000 pilots had taken their wings on it, the last unit touse it for all-through training being 3 FTS at Leeming.

. Squadron Leader Dick Smerdon was one of manypilots to fly both the fighter and trainer versions of theVampire:

[ first flew the Vampire 5 a the Day Fighter Leaders SchoolBy that time I had flown about 65 hours in the Meteor. Themos noticeable difference in performance was in ac­celeration, to the Vampire's detrimen. We used theVampire for Air-to-Ground firing, and for low level and divebombing. lt was a handy and responsive aircraft.

Two years later, I joined a Squadron still equipped withVampire F.3s. I well remember the poor acceleration andslow rate of climb as we took off for Malta with drop tanksht ed. In aerobatlcs however, the Vampire was delightful tofly. In March 1956, I did a little training in the Vampire T.ll.The side-by-side seating was novel for a single-enginedtrainer, but looking back there was a bonus over the Meteorof an ejection seat. I am not sure that I worried about that atthe time. Being a bulky chap, [ found the cockpit a rathertight ht.

Chris Ashworth recalls:

r- •

Insh Sea He turned onto 090 degrees, crossed an unfamlharcoast and, with tanks almost dry. landed at the first aIrfield hecame to m BelglUm l He had, of course. hI a Jet-stream

The VampIre was the first aeroplane I flew which was trulythree-dImenSIonal in hat It had a decent service ceIlmg Ittook a faIr ime to get up to 40,000 feet. mmd you, but It couldbe done and m reasonable comfort, unlike the roughlycontemporary Meteor T 7 m whIch It was difficult to even talkto the pupil at altitude because the cockpll was notpressunzed It was also an advantage to be able to see whathe was doing . or abou to do a faclli y whIch dId helpprevent such mIstakes as usmg the undercarnage mstead ofthe alrbrakes to recover from a 'hIgh speed' run

The aIrcraft was easy to start, taXI, take-off and land. Theview from the cockpit was very good and the controls wellco-ordmated The VampIre was an excellent instrumentflying trainer because it needed a hght touch to be flownaccurately, a useful cross-country machme because It was

De HavIlland Vampire T 11 aerobatic team of No 4flyIng TraIning School at Middleton St George in 1955

(Author's collection)

~-.l'.; ;

Squadron Leader Mike Sparrow also flew theVampire T.ll at FTS Valley:

runway on those tmy little wheels m a tmy little machme thatwas a sort of pram wIth wmgs It was really comiC

Squadron Leader Don Bri tain flew Vampires with4 FTS:

These aircraft had just arrived at Valley They had a verysolid canopy with several bars across the top of one's head.These first machines had no ejector seat, but later ones dId

A Valley I received my first met lectures on hIghaltitude condItIons I was told of a student who got airbornefrom Valley on a normal training high-level exercise Hechmbed through the usual cloud and carried out his briefedmanoeuvres which included high speed runs, aerobatics,etc On descending through cloud he could not get Valley onthe RjT but came out over a sea which he assumed was the

The first T lIs that came mto servIce at Valley had no ejectorsea s, had a small lid on top to get m and ou , and dId nothave the extra finnmg They were very sable m a spm, andprone to enterone from aerobatics. One crew on my coursewent mto a spm dehberately at 22,000 feet (it was normally20,000 feet), and the aircraft wouldn't come out. They tried toJettIson he canopy, but couldn't get he restraining strap off

1 was on the floor and had been constantly trodden on sohey sat there WIth full antI-spin control on waiting for the

end - It came out at 2,000 feet and they overstressed Itrecovenng. The "tudent quit and the instructor was gIvensome leave I

Because of the spinning, I never did a roll-off-the-topsolo until I had been on a squadron some considerable tImeAnother of my fnends got into a spm and couldnt get out HeJetllsoned he canopy, undId hIS straps and went out like acork out of a bottle he was in an inverted spm and out heshoti'

I never hked IRTs (Instrument Rating Tests) much, butthis was probably because 1never hked bemg supervIsed 1suppose I was perhaps slightly under-confident w en beingtested not that I ever faIled my test so far as 1 canremember Moreover, 1 preferred bemg tested on theMeteor since 1 was more at home in it than the Vampire,which 1had not flown very much Sometimes you didn't havethe choice, one or 0 her of the machines m he IR Flightbe ng unservIceable

It was a very cramped machme to fly m wo blokesside-by-side m a cockpit that had originally been deSIgnedfor one Admittedly it had been widened considerably, but itwas still rather a squeeze.

Previously I had bee Personal Assistant (PA) to AirVice-Marshal 'Zulu' Morns, who was SASO (Senior Air SaffOfficer) at 2nd TAF under Harry Broadhurst He announcedone day that he intended to fly up 0 Ahlhorn m a VampIre 5,so 1asked if 1could go too, never having flown a Vampire inmy life I had to dash off down to Wildenrath and getchecked out In hose days all you had to do was sit anddigest Pilot's otes, be sho n round the aircraft by someonewho told you how It started, what speed it stalled at andvanous other simple pieces of information. You clamberedin and off you went' It was all very relaxed. As far as I canrecall the only warning they gave me was to be careful onfinals. As the speed dropped off you had progressively topush the control column further and fur her forward un il italmost touched the instrument panel, otherWIse you wouldstall it. The nose up change of trim must have been quitesevere. I did four trips as No 2 to 'Zulu' Morris (ex-Battle ofBritain pilot I I felt very proud), to Ahlhorn and back toLaarbruch and back.

When you took off and landed you rattled dow the

De Havilland Vampire T11s of No 5 flyIng TraInIngSchool a OakIngton around 1954.

(Author's collection)

...,,_.~

(Eric Sharp)

De HaviJJand Vampire T 11 WZ6lO of No 45 Squadronat Butterworth, Malay In 1955

I first flew the Vampire T.ll in 1955 when flying Sabres with234 Squadron at Geilenkirchen in Germany There was notwo-seat Sabre, so we had our penodic ins rument ratingchecks either on Meteor T.7s or one of the two T.11 s of theInstrument Ratmg Fhght attached to Flying WingHeadquarters.

When your rating was due, once a year, you had to bechecked out on a senes of exewses (one of which wasmstrument take-of so as to retain your instrument rating(either 'WhIte', 'Green' or 'Master Green'). On everysquadron there was an IRE. (Instrument Rating Exammer)who had done the CFS course and who had probably beenan instructor at some stage. They were quite fair and gaveyou a thorough check, but if you weren't up to standard youhad to keep gomg back until they were satisfIed

Robin Brown also flew both versions:

; ;

~-.I'.comparallvely economical on fuel. and qUlte good foraeroballcs, especially in the looping plane Spinning, thattraIning essenllal, was not, however, a very ertainmanoeuvre, for the aircraf could put you into someInterestIng posItIOns. So could pupils dunng formallon flying,because much more anllclpatlOn was reqUired than onpropellor-drIven aeroplanes, both to ca ch up and slowdown

CIrcUlt flyIng was straIghtforward unless it was raining.Then it could be difficult to see forward through he flatWIndscreen, especially at mght The undercarriage gave ahard nde on the ground, and, unless the la ding was a'greaser' (now discouraged but then thought desirable), ontouchdown as well. Perhaps one of the most off-puttingfeatures was the strange noise sometlmes produced by theGoblin enqine.

The T.lls which I flew whilst instructing did not haveejector seats and we all risked incipient back troubleclimbing in and out with p rachutes strapped to us. Later I

Facing page, top:De Havilland Sea Vampire T22 XA107 '681' of StationFlight Lossiemouth around 1966 seen here fitted withlong range tanks.

(MAP photo)

Facing page, bo tom:De Havllland Sea Vampire T22 XG743 798/BY' ofStation Flight Brawdy around 1970.

(MAP photo)

Below:De HavlJland Vampire Tll 'N' of No 238 OperationalConversion Unit being serviced in the AircraftServicing Flight hangar at North Luffenham around1957.

(Eric Sharp)

flew VampIres WIth 'bang seats', but wasn't very Impressedbecause space was so llgh that the seat back leant forwardmaking it very uncomfortable.

Altogether I thought the Vampire an excellent trainer, if

a htUe on the flimsy SIde - certaInly the condescendIng nameof 'kiddy-cars' much favoured by Meteor 'drivers' had someJusllfication, for thelr aircraft had a Rolls-Royce feel about itwhich was not only due to the make of engine.

)

• , ~ < • • < • •

The Vampire was quite an easy aircraft to service, certainlyfrom a rigger's point of view, Almost everything was at eyelevel - hydraulics and pneumatics were grouped together inthe gun bay,

The bane of a rigger's life was the oil and water trapsituated in the gun bay, This had to be cleared twice a day,which meant unscrewing gun doors on non-modifiedsingle-seaters, These had very long screw threads quiteeasy to undo, but line-up afterwards was always a chore,Luckily most aircraft were later modified with three clips,and were very easy to clip up,

Wheel changes were a doddle, the main wheels havingjust a single large nut and split pin, I remember one sunnyday in 1956 at Oakington, a student pilot landed his Vampirewith brakes on and both main tyres burst on touchdown Heslewed the aircraft across the main runway and cut hisengine, There were abou! twenty other aircraft in the circuit.The duty corporal and I loaded two spare wheels and a jackinto the squadron Land-Rover, and took off across the grass,We jacked up one side, changed wheels, then the other side,hooked up the towing arm and drove off to the first exittotal time five or six minutes I

Geoff Cruickshank was a rigger with 5 FTS in themid-fifties:

one particular aircraft, Fresh from training as I was, I did theJob in a day, Feeling rather pleased with myself after wordsof praise from Chiefy, my balloon was pricked when one ofthe 'old sweats' told me 'Sergeant Smith usually does them,He can make up a pair in an hour', He could, too, as I saw formyself later on,

Something extraordinary happened one day at Pembreyduring an 'air firing phase', It was a fine day with clear skiesand the flight line was very busy, the Armourers especiallyso, arming up and galloping about with truckloads of liverounds all belted up, I had been assigned to assist with'straps in', 'seeing off' and 'turn rounds', A Vampire wasreturning from the range after a 'stoppage', its guns havingJammed during firing, when eight or ten rounds suddenlyloosed off inland in the general direction of Carway andTrimsaran, Everyone on the line heard it and, as one man,we took refuge, myself grovelling under a fuel bowser alongwith its civilian driver. At the end of its landing run theoffending Vampire braked to a halt and sat there with enginerunning, while a gaggle of rather pale-faced armourers setoff for it in a Land-Rover at a rate of knots to make it safe,Those stray rounds passed unnoticed by the localcommunity, and by God's good grace presumably did nodamage wherever they landed,

John Norris, who experienced the Vampire T, 11 asa rigger at 233 OCD Pembrey in 1957 recalls:

I was first involved with one on a ground run after an enginechange, After preliminaries - intake guards fitted, trolley­accumulator connected, etc, - an engine corporal made tolight up and begin the run, The electric starter wound up theGoblin engine nicely, but as the starter revolutions peaked,fuel surged out of the jetpipe, forming a large puddlebetween the tail booms, Grey fuel mist also emerged briefly,then there was a flash as the igniters woke from theirslumber, and the whole issue burst into flames, The occupantof the cockpit became rather agitated and indicated to myselfand others present that he would rather like us to push theaircraft forwards, away from the burning fuel. With a roaringinferno enveloping the tail hooms and tailplane, I had nodesire to go behind the aircraft Those with me indicatedhow the push should be applied - at the wingtips, But first thechocks had to be removed, Braver souls than I did this, thenwe pushed and rolled the aircraft clear of the fire, whichburned itself out quite quickly, Asecond start was then triedwith the same result and the same rolling forward, A towback to the hangar, and a new set Qf igniters effected a fix,and some time later a successful restart raised the whistlingwail of an angry Goblin

In time, wet starts became routine to me, and Iaffected acasual nonchalance about them, staring about with a boredexpression, Inevitably I ended up with Wadpol and ragscleaning the soot off the singed rear ends because suchchores fell to the sprog, Even raised on jacks the Vampirehardly towered above you, They were quite simpleairframes and while some things, like the engine, uncowled,were easily accessible, others were most definitely not. Forexample, the elevator and rudder cables inside thetailbooms called for a blind dexterity when they neededattention One could either peer through the access panels atthem or thrust one's hands inside and fiddle away at theguides,

The undercarriage and its retraction system was sturdy,neat and simple, rarely giving trouble and relatively easy toservice, Component changes were straightforward, as wasthe 'setting up' and adjustment afterwards, The cockpitpressurisation system was simple and rather crude bycomparison with systems I had to cope with in later years,The ejector seats in the T II's crowded cockpit always gaveme pause for thought, and no-one could have been morecautious than I about checking the safety pin positions beforeentering, Sprog as I was, my work was always carefullymonitored and generally the more menial tasks fell to me,except for one brief period of acclaim when I made up andspliced two steel cables for the undercarriage mechanism of

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

Specification (Jet Provost T.4)One 2,500 lb Armstrong Siddeley Viper 202.Span 36 [t 11 in, length 32 [t 5 in, height 10 [t 2 in,Wing area 213,7 sq ft,

Empty 4,650 lb, loaded 7,400 lb,MaXimum speed 410 mph at 20,000 it, initial climb3,400 [tjImn, range 700 miles, endurance 2. 5 hrs,service ceiling 30,000 it.

• ; ,

~-.l!. tn),Q).;

The Jet Provost en ered service with he RAF in1955, to become he first basic jet rainer 0operate wi h any of the world's air forces.

I says much for its design tha over 30 years later it isstill in service, though likely to be replaced beforelong.

It was in March 1952 tha he idea was first mootedof fit ing a jet engine to he Percival Provost.Jet-powered aircraf were hen rapidly becomingstandard, and some means was being sought ofspeedily introducing Jet engines into the initial stagesof flying training.

The first reaction to the proposal was that astrightforward conversion would be unlikely to provepracticable. The change in engine weight would have aconsiderable effect on the balance of the aircraft, and inturn this would almost certainly have a serious effect onthe aerodynamic characteristics.

evertheless, interest was maintained, and inDecember 1952 the Directorate of Research decidedthe idea should be pursued as it offered the possibilityof making a prac ical rial at a comparatively low cos,as compared with a completely new design. There washe added advantage ha if he experiment proved a

s ccess, it would be possible to convert exis ingfollow-up orders for piston-engined Provosts into JetProvos s. A basic jet trainer would consequently be inservice considerably earlier than would otherwisehave been the case.

It was agreed tha on this basis an order for ten JetProvos s for rials be placed, under SpecificationT.16/48 Issue 4, his being an ex ension of the Provostspecification to meet Operational Requirement OR.321.Some expense was inevi able, however. The fixedundercarriage of the Provost would have to go, andfitting a retractable undercarriage would be muchmore expensive. The new Viper engine which was tobe fitted would also be expensive, as the Jet Provostwould have to bear the high cost of the early engines,as opposed to sharing the cost with other Viper­engined designs which would probably have beenpossible later. Accordingly an order was placed for tenmachines, and the first of these, XD674, flew at Lu on on26 June 1954 wi h a 1640lb static thrust Arms rongSiddeley Viper 101.

This emerged as a side-by-side machine wi hunswept low aspect ra io wings, manual controls andhydraulically-assis ed services. As had beenan icipated, it proved necessary to compensate for heweight of he engine, which was now behind he crew.The cockpit had herefore been moved forward andthe fuselage leng hened. To compensa e for this, heside area of he tail had been increased and additionswere later made to the fin surfaces. D-shaped airintakes had been fit ed each side of he fuselageimmediately ahead of the wings, and it had also beennecessary to adapt the wing structure to incorporate a

re ractable undercarriage and addi ional fuel capacity,wi h provision for wing-tip anks. Spoiler/air brakeswere fitted bo h above and below the wings, whoseprofile had 0 be redesigned near the roots as theabsence of slipsteam rom an airscrew affected thelow-speed handling characterislics.

The first Je Provost T. Is to en er service wentinitially in August 1955 to he Central Flying School(Basic) at Sou h Cerney, then soon afterwards 0 2 FTSat Hullavington for service rials. Eighteen pupils werearbitrarily chosen for the first jet trainer course, goingon afterwards to complete their training on VampireT.lls, thus becoming the first RAF pilots to have doneso without ever having flown a piston-engined aircraft.The Jet Provosts on which they had flown were latertransferred back to the Central Flying School tocontinue this experiment at its main airfield at LittleRissington, when 2 FTS moved to Syerston in Novem­ber 1957.

Since then, he Je Provost has been periodicallyupgraded. The first change was the fitting of a 1750 Ibthrus Viper 102 (ASV.8) in the T.2 version, which firsflew on I September 1955 and had other modifications.Its undercarriage, flaps, air brakes and wheel brakeswere now controlled by a hydraulic system, theundercarriage was abou 3 feet shorter, and the rearfuselage had been redesigned to allow for a largertailpipe and to improve airflow.

The T.2 was only built in small numbers, however,and the first version 0 be used by the RAF in quan itywas the T.3, which had i s maiden flight on 22 June1958, production even ually totalling 199 aircraft. Inaddition to the engine change, this incorporated anumber of improvements from the T.1, including theshor er undercarriage, Martin-Baker Mk4 ejectionseats, clear-vision cockpit canopy and wing-tip tanks,UHF radio and Rebecca Mk8. It first equipped 2 FTS atSyerston in September 1959, followed later by the othersimilar schools.

This was followed by the TA, first flown on 15 July1960 and featuring th~ 2500lb thrust Viper 200. Toenable the RAF to evaluate the machine with thisincreased power, two early machines in the secondbatch of T.3s were completed with Viper 200s for trials.It was found tha he extra power made the aircraftmore versatile and, far from offsetting its capabilities asa basic trainer, actually enabled pupils to a tain ahigher s andard of flying. Orders were placed for aneven al total of 187 of this variant.

Finally came the T.5 first flown on 28 February1967 as a private venture, prototype XS230 being aconversion from a TA. Initially designated the BAC.145,this version had an ex ended nose, a rather bulboussingle pIece canopy, a larger jet pipe, additionalintegral wing fuel storage and an extra radio. It alsofeatured a pressurised cabin for high alti ude training,the system being controlled automatically and coming

in 0 operation when the aircraft had climbed to 8,000feet. Ancillary equipment included a hood seal, a newal imeter and a cabin-pressure warning light. InaddItIon here were various export versions producedunder he name Strikemaster. 110 T.5s were built.

Many T.3s and T.5s have been brought up to T.3Aand T.5A standard respectively these incorporatingnewer avionics such as lLS, VOR and DME. In hemeantime the makers have undergone a series ofname-changes, first 0 Hunting Percival in 1954, thenplain Hunting in 1957, next Bri ish Aircraft Corporationm 1960 and finally British Aerospace in 1977.

Squadron Leader Allan Corkett was involved in theintroduction into service of the Jet Provost:

The world's first ab initio jet training experiment was carriedout at 2 FTS, RAF Hullavington, Wiltshire, which became theonly Flying Training School to operate both the Piston and JetProvost at the same time.

The first course of pupil-pilots to fly the Jet Provostcommenced their training in September 1955, and therewere to be a further two courses completed before the endof the flying training experiment in ovember 1957. Thisunique trial, to evaluate the concept of pupil-pilots' flyingtrammg bemg carned ou only on jet aircraft, was carriedout by eight flying instructors and eight aircraft. I wasfortuna e to be mstructing on the aircraf throughout the twoyears.

TheJet Provost was a most pleasant aircraft to fly, withno handlmg problems. Its very small Armstrong SiddeleyVIper engme was fIrSt rate, with a very unusual charac er­istic for a jet engine of that time, in hat (if need be) thethrottle could be operated - in like manner to a piston enginethrottle - without the slightest tendency to 'flame-out'.

Early in 1955 two Jet Provosts had been used at theCentral Flying School during he preparation of a provisionalbaSIC syllab s. However, the fact that the training of the firstcourse of pupil-pilots commenced as soon as the flyingmstructors familiarisation trips had been completed, meantthat service trials of the aircraft were being undertaken atthe same time. It would, therefore,· have been quiteremarkable if 'teething troubles' had been absent during themost mtenslve flymg, often undertaken (as usual duringflymg trammg) by very inexperienced and quite oftenham-fisted pilots.

Nevertheless, I recall that although there were he usualminor problems, which were soon dealt with, three evenmore serious snags (which were design problems) resultedm only mmor damage 0 particular aircraft, and were sortedout without any serious disruption 0 the flying programme.

In a lighter vein, I remember that one of the moreserious problems came to light at our relief landing ground. Ihad posItIOned my aircraft on he grass alongside therunway pnor to demonstrating to my pupil a short take-off,and we were waiting for another Jet Provost to land. Ittouched down, and as it passed my aircraft its portundercarnage collapsed. The aeroplane gyrated behind uson one wing-tip, almost completing the circle and finishingWIth ItS wmg lip Just behind mine. Having noted from theaircraft's letter who was the instructor, I called over the R/T,'Good afternoon, Douggie'. I heard his reply '-, and a good

afternoon to you Allan', jus as [ sWItched my engme off andwen to his assistance The leg plVO was later redeSIgnedand fitted to all aircraft without further problems.

The trammg experiment was to prove a completesuccess, and the production mark Jet Provost, WIth ItS ejectorseats and refinements which emanated from hese tnals, hastoge her with later marks been the basic Jet trainer m theRoyal AIr Force for over thirty years. Also, It should beremembered that thIS aircraft has been used for militarypurposes by several countries over the years, espeCially in aground-attack role. Its robust construction has enabled it tocarry the weaponry, and the dash and superb manoeuvrabi­lity must have made it quite a useful striker

Peter Middlebrook was a pupil with 2 FTS atSyerston from June 1961:

The course proper started with ground school, and drillsdone on a static rig, which consisted of a Jet Provost fuselageWith sWitches and toggles on it, and fuses which could bepulled to simulate vanous failures We went through all theusual thmgs theory of flight, engines, mstruments, etc andin a surpnsmgly short period of lime we found ourselvessitting next to our instructors m the cockpit of a Jet ProvostT.3, quite a new aircraft at the time.

Throughout my time at Syerston, Idon't think Iever hadany problem flymg the Jet Provost. What I dId have aproblem With was getting it back on the ground It was anextremely light aircraft with a great desire to fly. The first exercIses we did consIsted of gently taxlmg the

aIrcraft out, turmng left, turmng nght, watchmg themstruments move, doing the checks, rumbhng round thepentrack to the marshalling pom Lessons seemed to bebased on imparting skills, imparting techmcal knowledgeand combining these with basic airmanshlp We always, asfar as I remember, flew with full mternal tanks and full tiptanks. Once at the marshalling point one carried out one'spre-take-off checks and checked the approach to see if anyaJrcraft were close to the airfield. If the approach was clear,one called for line-up and take-off. It was a very easy aircraftto taxi. Once lined up, one hit the brakes, opened thethrottle, checked engines, pressures, temperatures, JPTs etc,and if all was well, off you went.

It was a very easy aircraft to keep directionally straighton the ground, and at the appropriate speed, one appliedgentle back pressure and it took off quite easily. I rememberit as a straightforward aircraft to handle with no vices that Iencountered, and early exercises consisted of steep turns,30 degree banked turns and then on to more advancedexercises such as spinning and a little bit of cross-countrynavigatIOn

Once back in the circuit, one turned downwind and didthe downwind checks. I think I can even remember thesestill A- alrbrakes in; U- undercarnage down, three greens;F - flap take-off, the fuel 400 Ib at least; H harness tight andlocked; B brakes 'on', off' exhausting. My problem startedonce I turned finals I think what I had basic trouble with wasthe notion that if you were gomg to undershoot, this wascorrected by opening the throttle, whereas If the speed weretoo high, this was adjusted using the stick. This is, of course,a very simple and sound principle in retrospect, but as ayoung lad in my teens, flying a jet aircraft for the first time, I

.·..t-.~ ; :

~-.It'• .1:Q'.; <r ( <

i/,'

Hunting Percival Jet Provost T.ls of 0 2 FlymgTraining School at Hullavington banking over chffs in1955.

(Author's collection)

found it very difficult to put Into practice. I also found thatonce I had placed it firmly on the ground, it didn'tnecessarily stay there, and I think on my second solo tnp onthe aIrcraft I bounced all the way down the Syerston runwayfrom one end to the other In what I now know to be apilot-induced oscillation, whereby I was out of phase withwhat the aircraft was doing: worsening the problem. IsurvIved tha partIcular near-accident

I was not the only pu il WI h problems On my secondfamiliarisation, I was taxiing round the southern peritrack,when I suddenly became aware that my instructor wasex remely agitated. He kept shouting things like 'put thenose down' As we hadn't left the ground yet. thIS clearlydidn't relate to my actlvltles: so I looked where his eyeswere pointing and I saw a Jet Provost at about 1,000 feet overthe end of the runway in what looked like a semi-stalledcondition. It did at that moment stall, and fell all thosethousand feet back on the end of the runway with a greatBA G. It didn:t catch fire The next thing I noticed was thestudent Jumping out of the aircraft and running across at fullspeed back to the Crew Room, passing on the way the firecrew who were Intent on dowsing any flames that didappear.

I had been taXIing he aircraft all this time, and it was amiracle that I was still on the peritrack. We went round to themarshalling point, but it was quite clear the airfield wasgoing to be closed for some hme, so we taxied back downthe main runway, past the heap of wreckage whIch hadmoments earlier been a Jet Provost. We turned Intodispersal, closed down, went into the Crew Room, and foundthat the student involved had been taking off on a solocross-country with a full fuel load It had been a hot day, andhe had tned an extremely steep climb and just stalled heaircraft in. Apart from a scratch to the Slde of the head hewas completely unhurt. The Jet Provost, however, I don'tthink survived.

I also remember another incident when a friend of minewas taking off solo in the Jet Provost on he short runway atyerston. This started by the main ewark road and ran off

the far end into the Trent. As we passed the aircraft on theperitrack, I noticed that he had left his airbrakes out. Weimmediately radlOed him, and he closed them, shot off downthe runway and took off successfully I've ofte wonderedexactly what would have happened if he had left hisairbrakes out while he tried to take off on a short runwaywith full fuel load. Almost certainly he would have ended upin he river

Hunting Percival Jet Provost T. 1 XD693 'OZ' of No 2Flying Training School being refuelled at Hullavingtonaround 195~57. ote the very long undercarriagelegs, a hangover from haVing to keep the prop tipsclear of the ground

(Sqn Ldr AH Corkett)

It gradually became apparent that the course wasmoving into two distinct groups. There were those that hadprogressed quickly into solo, and were moving on with fewproblems. There was a second group, of whIch I was amember, who were haVing problems I remember It took aninordinate length of hme for me to go solo, and thIS was onlyachieved by changing Instructor to a very nice chap calledFlight Lieutenant Sweet. As I was having trouble going solo,he took me over, and we set off In a Jet Provost together toWymeswold: WhICh was one of Syers on s Relief LandingGrounds We spent about 35 minutes in the CIrCUIt He thenasked me to land the aircraft and stop it at the end of therunway as he was too frightened to carryon, and I had betterget on wlth it myself The moment for the first solo hadarnved I remember he got out of the aIrcraft. he made upthe seat so that It could be flown wIth only one pIlot, and I setoff gingerly round the pentrack. I stopped, dId all the checksat the marshalling point, parked on the runway and realisedthat thIS was it I opened throttles: let the brakes go and offwe went

I can remember to this day the surpnse I felt when thespeed bUlIt up much faster than normal. Before I knew whereI was, I was at rotate: I pulled back on the stick and theaircraft went up like a rocket. about 400 yards earlier than Ihad been used 0 It was only half way round the downWindleg that I suddenly reahsed that minus one pIlot, the httle JetProvost flew even more readily than with two pilots. Itcertainly was a major surprise, and I don't remember beingwarned about it Anyway, I flew a credi able circUlt, and putthe aircraft down for my first solo The Instructor then gotback i to the aIrcraft, and we flew back to Syerston. Heseemed well pleased. I certainly was.

Once having gone solo: however, progress still seemedto be slow A dlsaster occurred 0 me when Fit Lt Sweet wasposted after a few sor 1es I then had another Instructor,whom I loathed. According to him, he centre line of therunway ran all the way round the world, and met at bothends of the runway, and if he said I should be on the centreline, I should be on the centre line: wherever I was In regardto the aIrfield It was apparent from the start hat he and Iwere never gOing 0 make It together. As an Instructor hehad more chance of staying than I did.

About thIS hme I notIced members of the slower part ofthe course star Ing to disappear They were what IS knownas 'suspended: from the course: and made theIr way back toHornchurch. It became apparent that I was heading down thesame road when I came up for 'review'. This involved acheck ride with the Wing Commander He had obviouslybeen badly burned in an aIrcraft aCCIdent at one timebecause he was heavily scarred: and I remember whenflying with hIm that he was meticulous In making certain thatnot one extra inch of skin was exposed to any potentialfire-risk

I have to say tha my 'chop' nde was actuallyinspIrational We set off in the aircraft, chmbed above acloud and he put the aircraft into some unusual attitudes,which I promptly recovered from. We then motored on for awhile doing nothing in particular, and he suddenly handedover to me and said: 'Righ: find your way back to heaIrfIeld'. I have to confess I hadn't the slightest Idea wherewe were. But I do remember taking the situation well inhand, and I flew the aeroplane on a particular heading for aparticular period of time, and then at the end of what I

David Watkins serviced Jet Provosts at the CentralFlying School at Little Rissington during 1966-68:

During Apprentice training at Halton on the airfield, aninstructor, who had been given dispensation to taxi in orderto provide an element of realism, bogged down his JetProvost on the far side of the airfield. Needless to say, it wassome time before he reappeared on foot. either thedigging out team nor his flight commander were impressed I

Another Instructor demonstrated a dry start in the 'oldworkshops'. The noise in the confined space was veryimpressive. So much so, the Flight Sergeant made one of hisrare appearances in the bay, to say a few pithy words l

lightning onto the controls, but too late. Luckily the aircraftstalled wings level instead of flicking, and a heavy landingon all three wheels ensued. As with other students, hecouldn't explain why he did it.

Another of my students (who is now a Squadron Leader)checked three greens on the aircraft on finals, when in facthe hadn't got any lights at all. Why? Who knows? That's why Ithink there will always be accidents, all humans makemistakes. I know this is a fact - I remember making one in1951 1'

Ground crew also had their problems. NevilGardner recalls:

I arrived at the CFS in the spring of 1966 from a tour withJavelins (ugh ll ) of 228 OCU, Leuchars. The unit comprised No1Handling Party with Jet Provost T.3s and T.4s, and No 2 and3 Handling Parties with respectively Varsities andChipmunks, plus a detached Flight at Fairford (later Kemble)that new the dreadful Gnat. The Engineering Wing alsooperated a Scheduled Servicing Squadron and RectificationSquadron.

To my horror I was detailed for No I HP - the sight ofthree, sometimes four, lines of Jet Provosts (normally 10aircraft to a line) was awe-inspiring I The CFS operated aComposite Trained system, which meant that we had to beconversant with not only our own trade (I was an AirframeFitter), but also Engines, Electrics and Instruments.

The CFS, of course, trained seasoned pilots to becomeQFIs, and their course was quite intensive, often nying 10-15aircraft per 'wave' per day, so the Jet Provost proved arugged and forgiving aircraft. We often new with anInstructor if a spare seat was available. I found the cockpitquite roomy and well laid out, and the view from it wasexcellent. The aircraft seemed easy to fly provided the nosewas kept well up.

The JP was a basic aircraft, and looked rather toy-like,but it was easy to work on for servicing and rectification,having plenty of access panels The engine was equally easyto work on, having two large hinged panels on top of thefuselage. The nose cone was also hinged to facilitate accessto the radio equipment and to replenish the oxygen system.Tyres were frequently changed (especially at the beginningof a course), and the engine would occasionally suffer a 'wetstart' due to heavy-handed pilots. This was easily remediedby removing the two drain plugs on the underside, althoughthis invariably meant a soaked sleeve if you were slowremoving the drain plug. Refuelling between sorties was

XR697

.Jt__Ii-; i

pulled back smartly on the control column, and the twostudents just missed each other where I should have been.

At Cranwell, the Station Commander, who only had onegood eye, used to like formation. We calculated that if weonly put him into Number 3 position (echelon port) it wouldkeep him out of mischief and make use oj his one good eye.lt wasn't until just before he was posted that he commented,'Do you know, it's a funny coincidence that I always seem toget echelon port in formation, and it's bloody awkward asmy good eye is on the left!' We never did let on to himthough I

When a course graduated we used to do a flypastforming the course number, eg '96' would be flown - thenumber actually being flown in reverse to appear correct asviewed from the ground. On one I was in, I was on the insideof the number, looking right of course to formate, when inmy peripheral vision a tip tank appeared from the left. Thetwo leaders had got too close and the two numerals hadintermeshed. My opposite number was looking the otherway as well. I had someone with me at the time, but he neversaid a word.

Another student who had been doing very well caughtme on the hop as he had lulled me into a false sense ofsecurity - motto 'never relax l ' Whilst doing a normalpowered approach, instead of rounding out as normal hesuddenly jerked the control column hard back. Adrenalinflowed remarkably quickly and I moved like greased

-

oII

BAC jet Provost T4 XR697 '33' of No 3 Flying TrainingSchool at Leeming, dunng Wright jubilee Trophycompetition at Little Rissington in May 1966.

(Dave Watkins)

•

BACjet Provost T4 XP571 of the Red Pelicans aerobaticteam from the Central Flying School around 1963-64.

(Dave Watkins)

Squadron Leader Don Brittain, an instructor whohas flown nearly 5,000 hours on the Jet Provost, recalls:

I first flew JPs in 1961 at Cranwell, and have been flying themalmost continuously since except for two years on pistonProvosts in Malaya and two years on Buccaneers.

On a final navigation test a student told me we wereoverhead Diss (we were at 25,000 feet or so at the time).'How do you know?' I asked. He whipped on 90 degrees ofbank and pulled to the stall, in a series of semi-controlledstalls we sank, earthwards and he said, 'Cos I went to schoolin Diss and that's it down there'.

Once, I was leading two students in Vic formation and aswas the norm I told them to ease out for a breather. When Itold them to rejoin into close, they both slapped on too muchbank, and came in like bats out of hell. Doing my chameleonact, trying to look at both of them at once, I saw them bothreverse bank to stop coming in. Seeing two aircraft belly upcoming my way, I decided it wasn't a safe place to be, so I

thought was the right amount of time pointed down throughthe clouds and said, 'The airfield, 1think, is down there'. Hesaid, 'OK, let's have a look'. We descended through thecloud smartly, and sure enough there was the airfielddirectly underneath us. 1don't know what his feelings wereabout the whole thing, but 1was absolutely amazed.

We then joined the circuit, and 1did some creditablecircuits and landings. Eventually 1 turned off the runway,taxied the aircraft back to the pan, closed down and scuttledoff to make a coffee for the Wing Commander. What I foundencouraging was that he was debriefing me all the time, andwe actually had a very thorough debrief during the nexthour and a half. This was widely interpreted as a good sign.The efficient flying training system would not waste time onpeople who were about to be chopped. My future hung inthe balance for about two days, and then I remember beingsmartly suspended. I was not told this by the WingCommander, in fact I never saw him again. If I rememberrightly, I was one of about five people chopped during thatweek. We all found our way back to Hornchurch forreselection, and three months later I started navigationtraining.

Hunting jet Provost T3 XM384 '26' of No 2 FlyingTraining School at Syerston around 1960. Im­provements over the T 1 and T2 include an upratedengine, clear-vision canopy, ejector seat and tiP tanks.

(Hunting photo)

,, \

(John Lewis)

British AerospaceJet Provost T. 3A of the Central FlyingSchool COming in downWind to land at Scampton inOctober 1984.

look upwards, which added to the problems. The first llme Idid thiS parllcular job, my NCO ripped it apart and made medo It again I

All flymg controls on the Jet Provost were operated bycables except for the undercarnage, whIch had onehydraulically operated Jack, whIch in turn operated cableand pulleys to raise and lower the tncycle undercarnage.During my time working on the Jet Provost, they had aproblem WIth the undercarriage cycling Apilot coming m toland would lower his undercarriage, It would go down, showthree greens on the instrument panel then retract of its ownaccord. On occaSlOn thIS would happen just as the pilot wasabout to touch down. Several incidents occurred from thismalfunctlOn, on one occaSlOn when an aircraft was commg mto la d at our satellite s atlOn at Wymeswold, and of coursethe pIlot touched down on the underSide of the aircraft. I waspart of a team tasked to go Wymeswold, dismantle theaircraft and load it on a Queen Mary trailer to bring it back toSyerston for repaIr This was another new expenence forme, to go to another statIon, which was VIrtually Just arunway, and recover an aIrcraft. Dlsmantlmg the JP was noproblem, nor was loadmg It once we got the crane intoposition, but following the Queen Mary back along the A46 toSyerston doing about 50 mph with a polIce escort in front andbehmd was cer amly novel' ThIS undercarnage problemwas eventually resolved

Another problem we had with the JPs on the flight Imewas when refuelling through an open-line bowser The hosesand nozzles on these were simIlar to those on standardgarage pumps, hand-held nozzles bemg con rolled by theoperator After a spate of aircraft fuel leaks, an mves IgatlOnwas carried out and the problem was traced to the nozzlesbeing too long If the nozzle was pushed in too far, it nippedthe flexible bag type fuel tanks that were fitted m the wmgsTo remedy this, all the bowsers on the stallon had theirnozzles shortened We operated for qUlte a tIme WIthoutfurther problems, then suddenly the fuel leaks started again.It transpired that a new bowser had been delivered to thestatlOn, and nobody had realised that it had not beenmodified ThiS overSight resulted m further tank changes

Whl1e Iwas at Syerston they had a Mark 2JP, which gavea double bang m a certain attitude of flight, and Huntingrepresentatives were called in to try to find out the reason.The aircraft was given several est flights, and each piloreported the same double bang m the same attitude of flight,and at first it was thought these were commg from theundercarriage area Eventually, after a series of checks bythe representatives, the aircraft was grounded. After somemonths investigatmg the problem, Huntmgs came back WIththe answer tha the skm just forward of he mtake waspantmg at particular attltudes of flIght. I was then given thetask of stiffening the skin by riveting a stringer to the skin onthe inside. Once this had been done on one side it wasdeCIded to give the aIrcraft an aIr test, and as I had done thework I was given the optlOn of flymg on the test flight, whichwas quite a novelty for me

lUI l"L 11 ,IT \ IT ,~• lJll ) •;~-"I!.

; ,

Flight Sergeant Sam Mullen had Jet Provostexperience with 2 FTS at Syerston:

m the ca e of the rudder and elevator, for which rods areemployed in the area of the Jet pIpe All flying controls havebalance tabs, with the starboard tab on the elevators and theport tab on the ailerons acting as balance tabs, theiroperatmg wheels bemg located m the cockpIt Part of ourservlcmg mcludes climbmg up the Jet pipe area to mspectthe control rods and the forward fin mountmg Apart frombecoming very dirty, the whole area can give you acramped feeling nd it is always a relief to reach the outsideagam

I jomed the AIr Force march 1960 and tramed as anAIrframe Mechanic In December 1962 I was posted toSyerston, and there worked on Jet Provosts as a jUniortechnician There were about 50 JPs on the station, mostlyMark 3s, and the flying was on a centralised system from asmgle flight lme I spent most of my time workmg on therectification team m the hangar, where we carned out major,minor and pnmary servlcings etc, and also recllficatlOn ofany faults which were beyond the capability of flight linecrew The JP was a smashing aircraft to work on ost of theproblems were fairly easily dealt With, and there weren't toomany difficult jobs

One of the more awkward and complicated ones waswire locking of the undercarriage jack The JP being close tothe ground, one had to lie on one's back working upwardsthrough a small panel. and when adjustments were reqUlredon the eye end, It meant breakmg the wlre-Iockmg and thenrelockmg it, which was qUlte an involved job. The diagramsin the AP showed a view looking down on it, whereas ofcourse when you were actually wire-locking It you had to

charge of Pnmary, Pnmary Star and Equalised Servlcmg( os 1-4) The T.5 IS the version with tip tanks, no nosestrakes and hIgher tyre pressures, and the T.5A is thereverse

The Jet Provost on first SIght IS definitely a compact littlebeast, sometimes known as the 'Dmky Toy', part of 'TeenyWeeny AIrways'. First impressions should of course alwaysbe treated as such, as the Jet Provost is definitely designedfor those of short stature and slightly deformed shape Being6 ft 2 in and faIrly normal. the JP came as rather a shock,espeCIally for one used to the room available m the Vulcan,Victor and even the Buccaneer

Even fully raised on jacks, the JP isn't very high off theground, as many people can testify, with cut heads andlumps mIssing ou of theIr backs The mos commoncomplamt from this aircraft IS the mfamous 'JP knee', anaffliction that eventually hIts everybody in the AirframeTrade Though a very simple aircraft, most points of accessare located underneath

Fitted with a cable operated undercarnage, a carry­over from earlier JP marks, the JP5 would have benefited Ifthe cable, jack and mechanical locking presently fitted hadbeen replaced by the installation of a totally hydraulicsystem This would have simplified the servicing of thISawkward system

Other hydraulic systems fitted mclude the alrbrakes{liftspoilers, each side having an individual jack. The flaps arealso hydraulically operated, having one jack connected tothe starboard operatmg lever and connecting to the portlever by cables, the origmal rods havmg been removed bymodificatlOn action Flap operation is by hydraulics withTeleflex follow up, and mdication is provided by desyntransmitter

Flymg controls are manual and cable operated, except

At Cranwell I first spent one year m an airframe componentservicing bay, then the last three years as Junior CO in

Kev Darling is a Corporal A/T/A a Cranwell, wi hfour years experience of working on Jet Provost T.5As:

(British Aerospace)

simply achieved by two filler caps in the wmgs (one eachsIde) and the tIp tanks

Uttle Rissmgton was sHed on what must have been oneof the hIghest spots m the Cotswolds in summer youroasted and in wmter you froze. I recall one aIrman who wasdetailed to act as starting crew to the 'weather kite' on anearly January mornmg Pluggmg m he trolley-acc, heclambered upon the wmg to Jump in the cockpit, but slIppedon the Ice and fell. ScramblIng for a handhold, hIS handsliterally stuck to the metal on the wmg due to the sub-zerotemperatures A medic had to be called to release him toprevent the skin teanng from his hands Two weeks later,stIll suffenng from mmor frostbIte, he was posted to theMiddle East l '

BAC Jet Provost T.5 XW296 '57' and others ofNo 1Flying Training School at Linton-on-Ouse bankmg. mformation near FyJingdales early warnmg radar stationaround 1970-73.

•

T he first produc ion H nter F.1 made i s maidenfhght on 16 May 1953, and in hat same year theHawker deSIgn team began work as a private

ven me on a dual con r01 rainer version. By hat sageorders had been placed for aro nd 500 Hunter fightersto be buil both by the paren company and byArmstrong WhItworth at Coventry, and a potentialmarket could be seen for an instructional version.

The idea of a wo-seater version had been mootedrom he early days of the Hun er design, and these

thoughts now formed the basis of the Type P.1101.1mllally a modified variant of the F.6 was consideredbut production of his was some way off, and herefor~he FA air rame was selected as a basis for he

proto ype machine.

SpecificationOne 7, 700 lb Rolls-Royce Avon 122.Span 33 ft 8 in, length 48 it JOlj2in, height 13 ft 2 in,wmg area 349 sq ft.Empty 12,950 lb, loaded 17,200 lb.Maximum speed 610 mph at 36,000 ft, climb 121/2mm to 45,000 ft, range 1100 nautical mIles, serviceceIling 50,000 ft.

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

[}={] @l W(§~® [j

[}={] lUJ mJ~® [j 11 0 L7

All through my time at Syerston, working on therectification section, I thoroughly enjoyed working on theaeroplane, and thoroughly enjoyed the station At that timewe were working the longest hours In flying TrainingCommand and it wasn't untIl right at he end of my 2 years IImonths stay at Syerston that they eventually cut the hours 0 8o'clock in the morning to 5at night. Prior to that we had beenworking a full five day week from 7.45 am to 5.30 pm.

Being Flying Training Command, everything was donevery meticulously The JPs were stored overnight in ahangar, and towed out by the line team each morning forflying. Land-Rovers were used for towing, it being a lightaircraft, but for the final manoeuvring, especially in confinedspaces, such as when parking in the hangar at cease flying, itwas good 01 manpower push and shove e had oneIncident where a lad lost a button off hIS blue service dressjacket while towing the aircraft out in the morning. Thisnecessitated a loose article check of every JP on theflightline, which obviously took some time, and delayedflying by about three hours. We checked every aircraft,every cockpit, but couldn't find the button. Then we startedto search the areas over which the aircraft had moved thatmorning. The button was eventually found on the hangarfloor from which we had removed the JPSI

(Richard Keefe)

e go airbor e, and it took some time for me to set Iedown to flying as it was my firs flIght, but eventually I wasable to pick up this bang. There was no doubt that this wasthe solution, as at this stage we had only re-stiffened one ofthe panels and there was now only one bang. After landing, Iwas just taking off my flying suit when it was decided thatano her aircraft was gOing up on air test, and I was given theoption of flying again on this one, to see if it made a bang inthe same attitude of flight. It didn't of course, but Igot my firsttwo flights in the same afternoon, and I enjoyed themhoroughly. The second one in par icular because it wasgoing up primarily on stall checks, and It was quite anexperience for me to see the wings start to vibrate as the JetProvost reached the stall speed. Unfortunately Ididn't get theopportunity to fly in the ark 2 after the second panel wasstiffened, but there was no doubt hat he problem wassolved.

British Aerospace Jet Provost XW299 T5A '60' of No 1Flying Traimng School at Shawbury. This typerepresents the ultimate development of the Jet ProvostIn training guise haVing, amongst other improvements,a pressurised cockpit.

The naval T.8 variant stemmed from the Fleet AirArm's need for a suitable trainer for its secondgeneration of jets. It was fitted with an arrester hook,though only stressed for airfield emergency use andnot for carrier landings. The aircraft were used forweapons delivery training, some being later fitted withTACAN equipment, and were designated either T.8Bsor T.8Cs, depending on whether they had the full orpartial equipment. Assorted Hunters, includingtramers, are s III m service wi h the civilian-operatedFRADU at R AS Yeovil on.

Lieutenant Commander Don Pugh, later to becomeCO of 759 Squadron, had his first encounter with theHun er T.7 at R AS Lossiemouth, where he familiarisedin October 1958:

I found it very exciting, supersonic downhill and generally abIg step m performance from the Sea Vampire T.22 andMeteor. Returning to my base at R AS Yeovilton ! was ableto start the ball rolling with a Hunter capability there.

At that time the main use of the Hunter Tramer was toback-up he new Buccaneer and Sea Vixen squadrons withmstrument flymg and testing facilities The Sea VixenIntenSIve Flying Tnals Unit (700Y Flight) had Just formedunder the command of Cdr Malcolm Petrie, and the Hunterwas Ideal in providing general flying practice with thedoub ful serviceability of the squadron aircraft in those earlydays. By then we were flying the naval T.8 version rresterhook, brake chute and Avon 122 giving 7,5751b static thrust.

In 1961 a trainer was fitted with OR946 instrumentation

and based at R AS Lossiemouth. This was the Buccaneertype MRG (Master Reference Gyro) system, consistmg, as Iremember, of a central, large and accurate gyro stabilisedplatform from which was electronically fed inform tion onattitude, heading and yaw rates. This meant that instead ofinstruments having their own little gyros, they could beservoed electrically from the common source. In addition, anAir Data Unit provided performance data for the new type ofstrip displays. This aircraft afforded a very necessarytrainmg facility for safe familiarisatlon and instrument flyingpractIce on the ew style panel and for training in theweapon delivery manoeuvres appropriate to the Buccaneerm those days.

Hunter Tramers were usually held in the Station Flightsand avaIlable to squadron pilots as the training needs andgeneral flying practise requirements arose.

[n February 1963, HMS Ark Royal got a little perturbedwith a T8 making determined attempts at the deck, thoughnot hook down and always managing a late overshoot. I hadtaken Hawker's Hugh Merryweather out for a preliminarylook at deck approach problems before he P I127 waslanded on for trials l

I Augus 1963 was significant in the Hunter T8 story 759Squadron was commissioned at R AS Brawdy and given thetask of slotting into he training pipeline to give advancedpilot training be ween he Jet Provost and the Hunter GA.I I

Hawker PllOl prototype Xj6l5 ShOWing broadenedfront fuselage.

(British Aerospace)

• 11;) E~-.Ii.; ;

were found to be generally similar to that of the fighter,but at high subsonic speeds it suffered from airflows ability problems. The pilot would hear a noise like anexpress rain in a unnel and see hazy blue shockwaves forming 0 tside, gradually moving owards thetail as the speed increased. Various hoods were ried,but the problem was eventually cured by modifyingthe shape of the cockpit canopy rear decking. Themachine then became even quieter than the fighterversion, itself considered very quiet.

Asecond prototype (XJ627) flew in November 1956with a more powerful Avon engine and twin Aden gunsin the nose, -but when production orders were placedthe lower powered Avon 122 was specified, and only asingle Aden gun fi ted on the s arboard side of thenose. The type went into service as the T.7 and a batchof 55 was laid down based on the F.6 fuselage, but tenof these were completed for naval use, as the T.8. Inaddition, 31 FAs with low airframe hours wereconverted to T.8 standard.

The T.7 entered service with No 229 OperationalConversion Unit at Chivenor, near Barnstaple in August1958, being later used by a number of RAF units forins rument flying training, weapons training and otherpurposes. In 1967 it was issued to 4 FTS at Valley, togive advanced pilot tuition alongside the Gna trainer,and was la er used by oland 2 Tac ical WeaponsUnits at Brawdy and Lossiemouth (later Chivenor)respectively.

Hawker PllOl prototype Xj6l5, dunng trials in 1956.(British Aerospace)

Contemporary service hinking was tha side-by­side seating was best for uition, necessitating a newnose and cockpit assembly. This was 0 be attached to aransport joint bulkhead immediately forward of thewing-root air intakes, and its overall width would bedictated by that of the two Martin-Baker lightweightejection seats which were to be fitted. The soundness ofhe basic design led to all this being accomplishedwithout detriment to the handling and stabilitycharacteristics, nor to the original clean lookingdesign.

There were some fears ha the broader fronfuselage might lead to adverse effec s on he engineperformance, especially the possibility of flame-outunder some circumstances, though this later provednot to be the case. The sliding canopy of the fightervariants had to give way to a new two-piece hingedPerspex canopy, with a hood-jettison system connectedto the seat-ejection mechanism.

Meanwhile, official thinking had caugh up withHawker's concep . Specifica ion T.157D being issued inJanuary 1955, and when the Avon-powered proto ypemachine first flew on 8 July 1955 It had he servicenumber XJ615. During rials its hand ing characteris ics

L . Louis Beardswor h, R has flown Hunter T.8smore recen ly with FRADU, he Flee Requirement andAir Direction Uni opera ed at Yeovilton by FlightRefuelling Ltd:

FRADU is responsIble for Fleet tasks, providing aircraft forthe FIghter Controllers School and also for giving airexperience flights for pupils on the Junior Officers AirCourse. All ItS Hun ers are maintained by civilian staff

aval fixed-wing sta dards flights are now co-locatedwith FRADU and use the Hunters held by them Fixed wings andards, apart from testing and examining ('trapping') allfixed wing squadrons, use the Hunter for the SMAC309 SeaHarrier assessment course, continuation flying for RNRaircrew and training tasks of fighter evasion againstYeovilton-based helicopter squadrons.

The SMAC309 course is aimed at assessing the suitabilityof current rotary wing pilots for retraining to fly the SeaHarrier. It comprises 15 hours assessed flying, during whichthe pupil should achieve solo standard, and then continueson to cover low and high level navigation instrument flyingand close formation.

Hunters are also used at Yeovilton by the Sea Harriertraining squadron. 899 Squadron hold two T.8 s fitted withthe Blue Fox radar from the Sea Harrier. These are used for asmall number of the radar traming trips and occasIonally fordIssimilar air combat training.

Xl577

~-.Ii•

(Paddy Porter collection)

; i

Below:Hawker Hunter T.7 of No 12 Squadron at Lossiemoutharound 1984.

(George Ruby)

Above:Hawker Hunter T. 7s of No. 229 Operational ConversionUnit at Chivenor around 1959.

....;_.*and the Vixen, Buccaneer and Gannet OCU. 0 greatexperIence of flying training existed on the type The RAFused i for weapon training and first-line, of course, but noone had taught people how to fly with a Hunter syllabus. owwe had to write the book, the instruc or's manual. Manyhours were spent flying the lessons, finding the clearest,most e onomical way to put the message over. Drop tanksgave us a 50 minute sortie with sufficient reserve and a 60sorhe syllabus was designed.

The instruc ional staff arrived, the biggest gathering ofnaval FIs ever. They mostly needed conversion to type,then standardisation and categorisation. Then the greatmoment, the first students arrived - and didn't they do well.What a marvellous aircraft, so sweet to fly, with safe reliablesystems Training proceeded with little modification tosyllabus and none of the incidents that would excIte thereader - just hard training, thoroughly enjoyed by all. Theavailability of the hook which on an over-run could engagethe arrester wires at the far end at up to 15 knots, savedmany an incident where the student had come in hot andhigh. The barrier which the RAF would use to stop a T.1could write-off the aircraft.

Hawker Aircraft spent a lot of time and money making aspinning case for the trainer; you could sell an all-spinningadvanced trainer around he world. At hrst it was outbecause a badly handled entry could go inverted, and Iremember recovery required stick forward as in the erectspin. An average-size pilot could not have reached to full

Hawker Hunter T.8c WT702 '874jVL' of the FleetRequirement and Air Direction Unit at Yeovilton inAugust 1980. This example is unusual in havmg anose-mounted Harley light, fitted to aid visual acqui­sition dunng gun crew training.

(Author)

control when out on the end of his straps. We got thenegative-g restraint, but still could not find time or forcefulreason to spin the students.

I never flew the Gnat, but I know that whilst the R washaving great success WIth the Hunter at Brawdy, the RAF atValley could not get useful serviceability from the Gnat to dothe same job, and eventually they formed a Hunter T.1squadron to back up the Gnat.

•

Mark Hanna flew the Hunter T,7 with 2 TWU atLossiemouth

I was on one of the last Hunter courses, havmg already flownthe Hawk at Valley I remember how surprised we were thatImtlally we had just a two-day ground school and that was I ,whereas at Valley on the Hawk it would have meant one ortwo month's work, Most of all, however, we were surprisedin the two-seater Hunter at the shambles of instruments afterthe Hawk, Coming from the Hawk, which was a nice modernaeroplane wIth fancy layout, and bits nd pieces, and all thengh aVlOmcs and so on, the Hunter really was quiteconfusmg and, compared with the single-seater, all themstruments were in different places

Idon't know how the design logic as a tramer went, buteverythmg was different to he fighter. The starting systemwas different and it was cartridge as opposed to Avpin, Thebasic T-Iayout of the instruments was exactly the same, butall the engine speeds were different because it was adifferent SIzed engine 7,500 pounds thrust instead of 10,000m the smgle-sea er, so threshold speeds and all that sor ofthmg were different. All you can say is the actual basIchandlmg was SImIlar, though ObvlOusly there was less thrust

We never flew them as single-seat, though Ibelieve theydid at Valley, Primarily we flew them for initial weaponstraining, just to make sure you were getting the angle of diveright for dive bombing or for rocketing, Then you would becleared solo, and safe to go in a single-sea er I always felthat It wasn't really an instruchonal aeroplane by the tlme Iwas flying them at the T U, bemg by then more a safetycheck aeroplane For example, we did one or maybe twodual rides before we went solo on the single-seater. It wasbasically just to make sure you had some idea, and weren'tlikely to spear in on the single-seater, when you would begoing on to rocket attacks, for instance You would have aninstructor with you, who would check you dual, making sureyou were getting in the angles correct, and that you weren'texceeding the minimum ranges or anythmg, Then, pow, upyou would go in he single-seater.

We didn't deliberately practise formation flying in them,or anything like that, because we were already competent todo formation in single-seaters, As students, none of us likedflying in the two-seater. The view out was awful, with thestrutwork, and of course looking out to the right across theinstructor was never very nice, with someone sitting next toyou monitonng what you were domg

David Watkins serviced Hunter T,7s with 229 OCUat Chivenor in 1969-70:

The Hunter was a beautiful aircraft, and technicallysomething of a challenge to work on The pilots loved it,because of its dog-fighting qualities and the fac that i was an

excellent weapons platform, It was sleek, powerful and,before they started adding little bits on it, a joy to work on,

The OCU operated two servicing squadrons on a pooledbasis, and the three Reserve squadrons ( os 63, 79 and 234)were divIded up between them In practice, the Hunterflghters of 63 (part) and 234 Squadrons were opera ed by 0

I Servicing Squadron, whilst 63 (part) , 79 and Towed TargetFlight were the responsibility of 0 2 Squadron, The T 7swere also under the aegis of 0 2 Squadron,

I was detailed to one of four teams in the ScheduledServicing Flight of 0 I Squadron, and carried out Primary,Primary Star, Minor and Minor Star servIcing, Anything morehan thIs was given to the reSIdent 71 MU or Hawker workingparties,

The cockpll of the T.7 was faIrly well laid ou and, onceseated, I felt as if I was in a powerful sports car. I flew in oneon several occasions, and at flrst I was terrifled at the powerof the aircraft and sensitivity of the controls, Eventually, theexhilaration of flying in a T.7 at 20,000 feet over the BristolChannel became a greatly anticipated event during my timea Chivenor

To work on, especially in the undercarnage wells whenchanging fllters (I seem to recall we changed a lot of fllters),one reqUIred 12-mch flngers and the ability to bedouble-jomted l The rear fuselage was removed withmonotonous regularity, to enable the engine fitters to workon the Avon engines,

In 1969 the OCU replaced the West Raynham Huntercommitment of 'guarding the Rock' at Gilbraltar. ost days aSpanish AIr Force Hemkel flew a 'Milk Run' sortie up heborder of Spain and Gibraltar, and we scrambled a Hunter toescort it. ] still laugh as ] remember the sIght of a Hemkel flatout and a Hunter almost at stalling speed flying alongside it l

David also tells a rather sad story about atroublesome Hunter:

We had two resident 'Hangar Queens', an F 6 and a T.7 TheT.7 was probably a rogue aircraft with hydraulic problems,which affected its brakes, and I think we eventually changedeverything vaguely connected with the hydraulics, Afterbeing air tested, a student was detailed to take it up for thenext exercise, Returning 45 minutes later, he landednormally, but the brakes failed nd he overshot the runway,entered the barrier and went into the safety area, I was onDuty Crew at the time "and we raced to the scene of theaccident, only to find the cockpIt unoccupIed After a shortsearch we found the pilot, who had dashed off to the bushesfor a rather urgen call of nature, As the intrepid aviatorstumbled past us, he was heard to mumble, '] didn't want tobe a pilot, my mother wanted me to be a pilot - ] wanted tobe an estate agent',

[}={]@)~~®[J

~DcQ]cQ]®~®W

~mJ@)li

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:

Performance:

The Gnat started life as the Folland Fo, 140 designfor a llghtwelght fIghter, which was preceded

, by the Fo,139 Midge aerodynamic estalrcraf, Both were priva e ventures by this Hamble­based company, which had only limited experience ofaircra t building, but foresaw a market for such aconcept.

Folland's chief designer was W,EW, Petter, whohad previously worked for Westlands and later EnglishElectric, Wi h the latter company he had beenresponsible for the design of both he Canberra andthe pro otype Ligh ning, He had misgivings abou thetrend towards ever more technically complex andtherefore costly intercep or fighters, and saw in thenew small turbojets being developed an opportunity toreverse thIS,

The Midge prototype G-39-1 appeared on IIAugust 1954, powered by a 1640lb thrust ArmstrongSlddeley VIper 101. This was followed by G-39-2, theprototype Gna , which had its maiden flight on 18 July1955 at Boscombe Down, powered by a 3,285 lb thrustBnstol Orpheus B,Or.l engine, The test reports led toan order for six development machines with OrpheusB,0r.2 engmes glvmg 4,520 lb thrust, the first of these(XK724) having its first flight a Chilbolton 26 May 1956,They weIghed less than half the Hunter, for a li tle overhalf he cost, but arrived on he scene 00 lateproduc ion of he Hunter bE»ng by hen in full swing:The Gnat was considered in the ground at ack role as aMIddle East replacement for the de Havilland Venom,but the Hunter was selected because of its range and itsablllty to carry heavier warloads, The fighter version ofhe Gnat was, however, sold to both Finland and Indiaand the la ter coun ry buil over 200 under licence a~well as a development named Ajeet (Invincible),

DespIte the se back of no being selected by theRAF m the fIghter role, the aircraft offered potential asa two-seat advanced trainer with supersonic capability,and deSIgn work had m the meantlme been undertakenon this,

The proposal met with official approval, andspecification T,185D, was issued in January 1958,leadmg to a productIOn order for 14 pre-productionmachmes, The proto ype Gnat T,l (XM691) first flew a

SpecificationOne 4,230 lb Bristol Siddeley Orpheus,Span 24 ft 0 in, length 31 ft 9 in, height 10 ft 6 in, wingarea 175 sq ft,Empty 5,9001b, loaded 8,4001b (with full externaltanks).Maximum speed 640 mph at 36,000 ft, initial climb8,044 ft/min, range 1,180 miles, endurance (withdrop tanks) 2 hr 20 min service ceiling 48000 ft,

training is economy in operating cos s was offset by anumber of severe drawbacks. Is design was complex,despIte the ongmal concept, and caused engineeringproblems, particularly in respect 0 the sys ems andlongltudmal con ro!. The small cockpi gave thems ructor m the rear sea an ex remely limited forwardview. I was of. little prac ical use for weaponsms ruction, and pI ch control difficulties were neversa isfactorily overcome. I was eventually wi hdrawn in1978 in favour of the Hawk.

Flight Lieu enan Rod King was a Gnat student at4 FTS Valley in 1965, and an instruc or here in 1972:

4 FTS in both 1965 and 1972 was based in a combined StationHeadquarters and ground school, occupying a large numberof wooden huts located at the back of the old control tower.The Station Commander's office overlooked the taxiway, andtherefore there was some incentive to control one's taxiingspeed as one went past the window. If one didn't, questionswould be asked.

There were two Gnat squadrons at Valley, each with twoflights. Each squadron was commanded by a SquadronLeader, and each fl1ght by Flight Lieutenants, there beingfour or five Instructors I each flight. There was also aStandards Squadron, responsible for the quality con rol ofstandards of instruction and seeing that people wereteaching the right things. There was a further squadron,operating Hunters, and his was for foreign and Common­wealth training, because many nations, particularly GulfStates, operated this aircraft until the late seventies.

In 1965, students came from the Jet Provost with some160 hours on type at he end of their year on basic flyingtraining. The first hree weeks were spent purely in GroundSchool at Valley, learning the complexi ies of the Gnat. In

Hawker Siddeley Gnat T.l XM70B of the Central FlyingSchool at Little Rissington in 1962.

(British Aerospace)

~-.I'•; ;

these being capable of opera ing at runway level ifnecessary, and a any speed rom 90 kno s upwards.OR.946 fligh ins rumen a ion was fitted, similar 0 thatused in Ligh nings and other operational ypes offighter, and this made i necessary for the cockpit 0 beredesigned mcluding a new windscreen omi ing hegunsight and bullet-proof rame.

The Gnat was fully aeroba ic wi h drop anks inplace, and a variety of underwing stores could becarried. Possible armament loads included two 500 Ibbombs, two rocket pods, two Sidewinder or Bullpupmissiles. and two Aden gun pods. Alternatively,reconnaissance camera pods could be fitted. Its flyingslab elevators had emergency follow-up elevators, andit was fitted with anti-skid brakes, drag parachute andeleven fuel tanks.

Further Gnats were supplied to the CFS, but themajority went to equip 4 FTS at Valley, and fromNovember 1962 the Vampire T.ll began to besuperseded as the standard advanced pilot trainer inthe RAF. One big factor in the selectiQn of the Gnat wasits comparatively low price, which offered the prospecof reducmg the steadily increasing cost of training aplIo. The ProvostjVamplre sequence, for instance, hadraised this bill by around £10,000 compared with theprevious Prentice/Harvard/Meteor sequence. Pupilsnow comple ed 160 hours flying on Je Provosts, thenwent to Valley for 70 hours on Gnats beforeproceeding to an Operational Conversion Unit. Thesetimes were later varied, and by 1973 direct entrys udents were undertaking 100 hours on Je ProvostT.3s, followed by 45 hours on T.5s, then 85 hours onGnats.

In service, the Gnat was found to have its faults. Itwas not particularly stable, but had sensitive controlswhich made it very manoeuvrable, and challenging tofly. It was a great success with the Red Arrowsaerobatic team, which formed in 1965, but for normal

ned in akes. The engine provided enough power for ito reach 40,000 ft in only seven minu es.

Shor ly after he irst fligh, the parent companybecame absorbed into the Hawker Siddeley Group,and consequently he aircraft became the HawkerSiddeley Gnat production being later ransferred 0

Dunsfold.The first eight pre-production machines were

earmarked for evalua ion at Boscombe Down andFarnborough, the remaining six being delivered to theCentral Flying School at Little Rissington in early 1962

•

Chilbolton on 31 Aug st 1959, powered by a 4,230 Ibthrust Orpheus 100, his having been derated sligh ly togive longer periods between overha Is and improvedfuel consump ion figures. To mee specificationrequirements, the airframe was strengthened to reacha stipulated fatigue limit of 5,000 hours flying over tenyears. In theory it had a simplified structure, designedso hat compara ively major components could bereplaced economically during this period - but inpractise, RAF ground crews took a rather differentview.

(RAF Museum)

The lengthened fuselage accommodated an ad­ditional seat in tandem, the RAF having by nowdropped its previous stipulation hat advance trainingshould be side-by-side. This had the advantage ofgiving the pupil pilot in the front seat a view moreapproaching tha to which he would have to becomeaccustomed in squadron service, and was especiallynecessary for formation flying.

The wings were of greater area than the fighterversion, and therefore reduced the landing speed, butto maintain high speed performance their thickness/chord ratio was reduced from 8 per cent to 7 per cent.They incorporated additional fuel storage in heleading edges, outboard ailerons and conventionalinboard flaps, which provided sufficient drag for acomfortably slow approach, especially when using ILS,yet the machine could reach supersonic speeds in adive. It had larger upright tail surfaces, and redesig-

Folland Gnat T.l XM69l, the first pre-productionaircraft, powered by q 4,230 lb thrust Bristol SiddeleyOrpheus 100.

for service trials. Specifica ion T.185P had meanwhilebeen issued in February 1959 for a production version,resulting in an order for 30 machir..es, followed byfurther orders or 20 and 41 respectively. Although theGna was a small machine, the con ract required it tohave much of the equipment which would be fitted inopera ional types then under development. Thisincluded new flight and navigational instrumentpresentation, engine anti-icing, liquid oxygen andmany other items including a centralised failurewarning system Two of Folland's own 4GT lightweightseats were used in the new ejection escape system,

I'

; ! ~•••f_,i • m)ir;

parhcular the electrical system, the hy raulic system and thelongitudinal control system, of which the last two systemsdommated the life of every student and instructor who everencountered the Gnat. AWed 0 these systems were twoemergency drills, STUPRE and CUBSTU , burned vividlymto everyone's memory

In the next 16 week, students Oew a total of some 76hours, of which some 21 hours 10 minu es were solo and 48hours 20 minutes were dual by day, a d some 3 hours weresolo and 4 hours were dual by night. The official syllabuslength was some 70 hours, but there is always IncidentalAllowance (IA) in such syllabuses to cater for aircraft that gounserviceable, bad weather or even 'failed' sorhes,

There were also some 13 hours in the Gnat simulator.This was built in vans which were fully mobile, the intentionbeing that one could redeploy the simulator at short nohce,There were some problems, however, when it was firstinstalled, as the lorries were found to be too wide for theMenai Bridge, They were therefore driven to Liverpool, thenput on a ferry for Ireland, from where they were re-shippedto Holyhead, Having got these expensive vans to Valley, theywere put on a concrete plinth, but it was quickly discoveredthat Force 8 gales and rain gave problems, and thereforewouldn't it be a good idea if a roof was put over these vans?After a little while, someone said - if we've got a concretebase and a roof, why don't we put walls around them - andwe ended up with these expensive vehicles totally enclosed,This proved to be no problem unhl about 1977, when theGnat was phased ou and we tried 0 get the vans out tomstall he Hawk simulator and associated equipment. Wefound the only way was to deOate the tyres, and they wouldthen just get ou under the door lintel!

My next encounter with the Gnat was in 1972, when Ibecame an ins ructor at Valley, having done the Gnatrefresher course, I had done this because 1 had been a JetProvost instructor, and it was easier to make me a Gnatinstructor than to hew someone out from square one, TheCFS refresher course on the Gnat was about three monthslong, and was really geared to instructors who hadpreviously Oown the Gnat some time in the past. It was some50 hours long, of which 9 hours or so were solo by day, 35hours dual by day, with 1 hour 40 minutes night solo and 3hours 30 minutes night dual. At the end of this course, whichw s carried out at Kemble, one went to Valley, which was theonly FTS then using the Gnat, and in the next two years I Oewsome 700 hours on the Gnat.

It was a complex aircraft, which students found difficult,and instructors equally so, As some seven years previously,life was dominated by STUPRE, which had now becomeSTUPRECC, This is he drill for going manual fromhydraulically-operated controls, whereby you get theaircraft Speed below 400 knots (or ,85 ach); you Trim thefeel trim to the ideal sector set, which puts the stick into themiddle of the cockpit. You Unlock the elevators, using anumbrella-shaped handle on the left hand side of he cockpit;P IS for power to put the cock off to make sure that if thehydraulic pump subsequently recovers, you don't get apulse of hydraulic Ouid or pressure through he system YouRaise the guard 0 the standby trim so that you can motor thetail elec rically, which provides your main source ofcontrolling pitch, your fine control then being provided bythe very small elevators, So it is a reverse of the normal wayof controlling an aircraft,

One also then had to Exhaust the accumulators, whichwere built into the hydraulic sys em and enabled you, if thepump failed, to recover he aircraft to straIght and level Oightbefore you went through the full drill for putting in tomanual. Wi h the accumulators exhausted, the controlsurfaces then froze m the nght poslhons, Finally, one thenhad to Check tha one had Control in itch and roll. This wasa consequence of some embarrassmg examples of peoplerolling or completing a landing and take-off with the tailpIa eabsolutely frozen, There were vanous other incidents withthe longitudinal control system which were required to bebrought into this check We also had a changeover systemwhereby we could move the standby trims from operatingon the console to the normal feel trim switch on the stick,

The CUBSTUN drill was to cater for failure of analternator, which meant that you lost all electrical power,You were then running the aircraft, which was essenhally anelectrical aircraft, on battery power alone, and the mainbatteries would only last you 20 minutes, So you now had adrill called CUBSTUN, which was Cabin altimeter to static,UHF to standby, Booster pump off, Speed, Trim and UNlock,

Facing page, top:Hawker Siddeley Gnat T.i flight line of the CentralFlying School at Little Rissington around 1962-63.

(British Aerospace)

Facing page, bottom:Hawker Siddeley Gnat Ti formation of No 4 FlyIngTraInIng School at Valley In 1964.

(British Aerospace)

Below:Two Hawker Siddeley Gnat T.is of the Central FlyIngSchool at Little RissIngton In 1962.

(British Aerospace)

• ~-.l.; • )1 ? t;

m the same way as you aId with the STUPRECC dnll. ThIs putyou into a condition called U LOCK, whereby the hydrauhcsys em was still working, but by unlockmg ended up wIthextremely light con rol loads and no necessIty to tnm Asyou had no need to use the electrical trim, you didn't drainthe battery. A lot of time was spent in the early stages of thecourse, teaching these two drills to the s udents.

My own view was that if you could get a student throughthe first fortnight, which was essentially first solo on type,then he really had got the course cracked Much of the 70hours of the course was spent on learning to fly the Gnat, tohandle its peculiarities and to cope with the emergenciesthat could arise from either failure of the hydrauhc system,or he engine flaming out This was necessary because if theengine flamed you lost both he hydrauhcs and the electncsSo you were gomg to go through both those dnlls again ofSTUPRECC and CUBSTU

The pace of work for the student on the first part of thecourse was very high. There was a phase bnefmg nearlyevery nigh, this being a mass brief on an aspect of operatmgthe aircraft. In the case of 'manual', you had not only a massbrief, but also a hangar demonstration m whIch the aircrafwas jacked up in the hangar wi h a hydrauhc ng on It so thatyou could demonstrate what happened at vanous stages offailure or various conditions of flIght. ThIS took some 30minutes, followed by a ph e brief of some 40 minutes Inaddi ion to this, with regard to manual, he student must alsohave done a certain number of exercises in the simulatorThere were therefore a number of critical points that had tobe fulfilled before a student could be sent solo It was notunknown in fact for students never to go solo on the Gnat, asthey didn't reach the required standard, and m practise soloproved to be the big weeding out pomt

Half way through the course, as indeed we have now onthe Hawk, we had an Instrument Rating Test, to test the ablhtyof the student to fly the aircraft on instruments. There wasalso a progress check to evaluate a student's ability to fly theaircraf doing general handlmg stallmg, spmnmg,aerobatics, forced landings and C1rcmts The second half ofhe course, whIch was about the last 30 hours, covered hlgh­and low-level navigation and formation and some 7 hours ofnight flying. .

Amajor problem of instructing on the Gnat was the vIewfrom the back seat, particularly with the aircraft in manual, asthis required a flapless approach to the aIrfield WIth a hIghnose at itude, resulting in a restricted vIew from the backcockpit, especially in conditions of no crosswmd. Becausethe Gnat is a swept wing aircraft, it generates large amountsof drag at low speed and this is particularly important on theapproach The aircraft must not be flown too slowly, and theapproach path should not become 00 steep. Either of theseconditlOns could lead to a heavy landmg, a bounce andperhaps a pilot-induced oscillation. The only correctiveaction for this was to hold the stIck m the mIddle, keepmg thewings level, apply full power and blast the aircraft awayfrom the runway before getting into too much harm. If onepersisted with a PIO, and didn't take the nght correctIVeac ion, one could end up WIth qmte severe damage to theaircraft. Perhaps, also, a situation whereby one tned to eject,but the aircraft had been damaged, and ejectlOn seatperformance degraded such that one might not survive,because i was only a 90 knot seat straIght and level.

The view on the approach from the back sea was

exacerbated at night by large areas of double reflections inthe large bubble canopy There were simIlar reflectlonsfrom the blast screen which separated part of he rearcockpIt from the front COCkPIt, and was mtended as ameasure of protection for the mstructor m the back seat If themain canopy shattered for any reason such as a bIrd stnkeAt night, therefore, m manual or on a flapless approach, Ifthe student started to get high, one lost complete SIght of therunway The only remedy was to tell the student to overshooand go round again for another approach, because youcouldn't be sure exactly where the aircraft was m relatlOn tothe runway.

The swept wing characteristics of the Gna also showedup in buffet handling, which was mce and smoothlygraduated from light to very heavy buffet. LIke all true sweptwing aircraft m heavy buffe , the aIrcraft would pItch very,very well, but it would lose performance very rapIdly. ThIswas shown in two demonstrations that we used to fly, of aloop starting from the same speed of 350 knots and using fullpower In a loop on a light buffe the dIameter of the loopwould be some 6,000 feet, bu in heavy buffet WIth wmg rockthe dIameter of the loop could be reduced to some 4,500feet The only difference was that on the loop WIth the hghtbuffet, the speed of exit from the loop was the same as whenone went in, but after the loop in heavy buffet one came outsome 100 knots slower So one had reduced the diameter ofthe loop by some 1,500 fee, but had lost 100 knots of overallperformance.

Another demonstration that had to be flown was toreinforce the problems of getting slow on the final approachWe decelerated the aircraft with undercarriage and flapdown, towards the stall, with the engine at idle. Then, some 7knots before the stall, slammed the thro tle open, and it tookthe engme take some seven seconds to wind up. In that time,the aircraft decelerated to 115 knots, one had the maxImumangle of tail applied, some 15 degrees, with the stick on theback stops, and one had full power applied and one was at115 knots. You were unable, therefore, to accelerate theaircraft, you were unable to stop it going down, and youwere effectlvely i a jam - you were stuck. ThIs was a veryconvincing demonstration, but it took a lot of flymg and oneconcentrated perhaps too much in the rear cockpit on thevertical speed indicator, sometimes called the RCD! (Rate ofClimb and Descent Indicator), to make sure that you wereflying his de!TIons ration exactly level, because unless youdid hat the demonstration did not achIeve ItS full Impact.

Another interesting aspect was that from 1965 to 1972 wehad lost a number of aircraft in accidents of various sorts,usually related to the longitudinal control system. Conse­quently there were a number. of areas which one wasallowed to practise as a student m 1965, but whIch by 1972had become the sole prerogative of 'A' category mstructors,the most notable being forced landing in manual. ormally,if the engine flamed out, one would be able to ghde. theaircraft back to an airfield and carry out a forced landmg.Provided the engine remained windmilling at about 10 or 15per cent rpm, this was sufficient to keep he hydrauhc pumpon line, and therefore the flymg controls m power ThISmeant that one had a reasonable degree of control over heaircraft, and provided one didn't thrash the stick around andtherefore make excessive demands on the hydrauhc system,enough control would be available to land the aircraftwithout problem. One or two mCidents occurred, however,

whereby the Judgement required proved too much for thestudent and a heavy landmg ensued. Thus, by 1972, this wasone of the exercises which was restncted to instructors only.

Another problem with operating the Gnat as a teachinginstrument, was its endurance. Although it carried some3,0001b of fuel, the Orpheus was a very thirsty engine. Inconditions of bad weather where one might have, say, a200 ft cloud base a Valley and a visibili y of approxImatelyhalf a mile, one could require fuel to go to a diversionairfield, perhaps some 200 miles away, a good examplebeing Leuchars. Under these circumstances, the maximumlength of sortie one would do with a Gnat was a climb to20,000 feet, and an instrument recovery straight away, a totalsortie length of some 20 25 minutes. Therefore hediversion airfield that the Gna was almos totally orientatedtoward was Shawbury, some 70 miles away just over theborder in England, and consequently our activities wereclosely interrelated with that airfield It was thereforenecessary to show the student a practise diversion toShawbury in the early stages before he went solo, and alsofor him to do a night sortie where, again, one did a practisediversion to Shawbury.

The other problem with the Gnat was that with its sweptwing, and narrow track undercarriage, it was verysusceptible to crosswinds, and therefore the maximumcrosswind component that could be accepted in normaloperations on a dry runway was some 20 knots If he runwaywere wet, this dropped to 10 knots, although If the runwayhad a friction surface it could be increased to 15 knots. For astudent, however, the maximum crosswind limit was 15 knotsdry, and some 10 knots wet. In a strong crosswind the Gnatproved something of a handful. It wanted to lean out of wind,it wanted to drift sideways on the runway and, because of thepeculianty of its braking system, it was very easy for thepilot to get his feet out of synchronisation with the brakingrequired. This was due to a component of the system calledresponse valves which delayed the application of brakepressure when one plan ed one's foot on the brake pedal,but also kept the braking pressure applied after lifting one'sfoot off the brake pedal. If one got out of synchronisation, theaircraft went down the runway rocking and rolling as well asdrifting sideways in the crosswind.

There could also be problems with the Maxeret anti-skidsystem components which were prone to fail, leading to acomplete loss of brake pressure on one side. As the Gnatwas steered on the runway or the taxiway by differentialbraking, this meant that you were unable to turn one way orthe' other The Gnat was also fitted with a brake parachute.This was really a training aid because the Gnat had originallybeen intended as a stepping stone from the basic trainer tothe Lightning. The brake parachute was not terribly rehable,al hough it was quite helpful as a raining aid, but It onlyknocked some 600 feet off the normal ground roll, which is acomparatively small amount in relation to a ground roll ofsome 4,800 feet l

Ray Hanna, former leader of he Red Arrowsrecalls:

I was posted to the CFS and the Red Arrows from instructingon Meteor T.7s and F.8s at the College of Air Warfare,having flown Meteors previously on squadrons, and suppose

I had about 1,000 hours mstructmg on the T 7 Trans1tlOmngfrom the Me eor, whIch really was a firs generatIOn jet, 0

somethmg like the Gnat which was second, maybe thIrdgeneration, WIth powered flymg controls, swept wing, etc.,and with all sorts of modern aviomcs very similar to theLightning, my first impressions of the Gnat were just that itwas totally delightful, and very, very sensitlve after heMeteor

In a sense It was much mcer to fly han, say, the Hunter,and of course the 'NO aircraft were always bemg directlycompared. The Hunter was bigger and more substantial, hadmore power, and at height had a better power-weight ratio.The Gnat's altitude performance was disappomting from theexcess thrust poin of view The Orpheus had about five andhalf thousand pounds of thrust at sea level, and at anythingover 25,000 feet It seemed to me the aeroplane suffered alack of thrust. But low down it had all that was necessary.

It had the same sort of low-level performance as theHunter or the Swift, and was much nicer to fly, moresenS1 ive, but being so hght (seven and a half housandpounds), it had a very, very low wmg loadmg for a sweptwing aeroplane. Somewhere around 40 pounds as opposedto 50 or 60 on the Hunter, and even more on the Swift, so thewing loading was down about the same as the Meteor Thismade it a very manoeuvrable aeroplane, particularly at lowaltitude, but it did bump around in turbulence

From another handling point of VIew, of course it wasn'tsupersonic straIght and level, and had to be dived to achievespeeds over Mach I, but in not quite such a determined diveas the Hunter or the Swift. If one rolled over, and literallypulled through vertically, the aircraft could achieve almost1.2 Mach, something more han either the Hunter or he Swift.

I never instructed on the Gnat, but flew m the back seatfrom time to tlme checking other people on the aerobaticteam. Of course the back cockpit was fully eqmpped and wasfully dual. We were so confident in our days on the Arrows. Ithink things have changed a little bit since hen; thingsseemed to be more relaxed and more free and easy in theAir Force in those days, and for example we frequently flewphotographers in the front seat. They were obviously givena very close briefing on the undercarriage and various bitsand pieces generally, in a sense it was very similar to takinga student on his first trip. My memory of the back seat wasthat it was quite difficult to get into, it was a very confinedspace, but once you were in it was very comfortable.

The Folland seat was exceptionally comfortable. Theback seat had a visor arrangement around ii in case you lostthe canopy, so that the instructor had this fixed perspex visorin front of him basically to stop wind blast, and you could seethrough that very clearly. You could see left and right of thestudent's position The only problem was that you weresittmg WIth the coaming more or less level with theshoulders, such that the view downwards and forwardstended to be restricted. Looking aft, the top surface of thewing again obscured vision.

One could override anything. The aeroplane was fullydual, though you couldn't see what the other chap was doingin he front

The Gnat did have a rather comphcated flymg controlsystem. It was fine when it was in the normal hydraulic mode,with the aeroplane flying as it was designed to do, that is withthe tailplane in the slab mode, powered. Other modes were:powered 'follow up', elevators disco nected from the

Nevil Gardner also has recollections of the Gnat,while Apprentice training at Halton:

I enjoyed my training on these, they could be a little fiddly,but were quite interesting. Some of the 'quick releasefasteners' should really have just been called fasteners, or

3,000 lb psi, which in this case were all coupled to a large'chamber'. This was welded up from steel plates and wasnothing more than a crude box with a pressure gauge set ontop of it. To this chamber was also connected a pukka airs arter hose with 'connector, aircraf' a its other end Adesperate affair, but we dIdn't want he place cluttered upwith dead Gnats. They had to be got nd of, legally. I wasdelegated to the start-up team and given a briefing. 'Whenthe jock is strapped in and happy, watch for his thumbs upsignal and reciprocate by giving him the 'clear to startengine' signal [raise the right arm, first finger extended androtate It]. Then whop all four bottles open with the four keysprovided and awaIt results.'

At the appointed time the aviators arnved suitably clad,mounted up and gave the signal. I responded with 'clear tostart engine', and my man Bhastily slammed open all four airvalves on our starter. There followed a sound of rushing air,the hose twitched and went taut then began to quiver. Theair gauge registered 20 - 40 - 60 psi in a rapid ascent ofpressure, then there was a loud report, he roar of escapingaIr and the fleeting impression of flying fragments. Man Band I dived to the ground just as the large hose reared upand flew over the Gna and settled across its wings andfuselage like some mons rous expiring snake

When events had stabilised a little, man B and I aroseand turned off the air bottles to silence the roar of escapingair which was persisting, and took stock of the situation. Firstwe helped he two visibly shaken pilots from their cockpits,hen all four of us carefully examined our starter and theiraIrcraft for damage. The Gnat was unsca hed, no damagewhatsoever, but our welded box/aIr chambel" had disinte­grated, blown to bits before our very eyes, and no sign ofthe fragments. Some parts of it had probably landed inCornwall, the remainder in Somerset. The air, gauge, whichpresumably went straIght up, was found some days lat~r,

many hundred of yards away from its point of departure. Thetwo pilots wandered off shakily in the dIrection of theOfficer's Mess, mut ering something about needing a pint.Man Band I set about explaining to Chiefy, who had by nowcome across from his office to investigate the loud andunfamiliar noises. Very red and cross he was, too, arriving inthe van of the rest of the line personnel - who all seemed tofind the situation hilarious. After tearing us off a strip hedirected man Band me to go and have a cuppa and bit ofrest for five minutes - no more!

The sequel to all this was that an aIr starter trolley wasbrought by road from Valley the next day. Speedily put touse it sent the Gnat on its way. We dIdn't have many visitsfrom the same quarter again, nor did we ever receive a'trolley, aircraft, starter, for the use of'. The 'Red Sparrers'always brought their own ground crews and groundequipment when they came to perform on Open Days. Our'starter trolley' was demodified and reverted to i s properrole and anonymity on the flight line. It was a miracle none ofthe four of us was killed or maimed in the debacle.

•~-.I!.; ;

Ground handling could have is problems. Johnorris had a rather nerve-shaking experience at

Chivenor, when a visi ing aircraf dropped in from4 FTS at Valley:

The Gnat's Orpheus engine had a compressed air starterwhich required copious quantities of air at about 50 601bspsi. We lacked the proper air trolley at Chivenor, andinstead had to use a cobbled-up affair of the type so commonon every RAF fligh line. It consis ed of four large bottles at

with 16 degrees aileron movement. This 16 degrees wasincreased to 28 degrees at speed below 150 knots byelectrical wi hdrawal of aileron pins so, by taking out acertain fuse, the rate of roll could be increased dramatically.

The aircraft was designed as a single-seater. When twoseats were put in, the Centre of Gravity altered dramaticallywith the undercarriage lowered, so that an automallc datumshift had to be included in the lowering sequence, giving anautomatic minus 31/2 degrees on the tailplane (all-flying). Ifthe powered flying controls failed, a manual back-up systemwas available. This was very complicated and severalfatal"ties were caused by incorrect use of this system. Oncehe systems were mastered, however, this aircraft was lovedby its pilots. Ejec or seats were of Folland design and verydifferent from Martin-Baker types.

The engine was very reliable - I never knew one to failin 41/2 years of flying the aircraft I did have a potentialengine failure once when I took a Gnat up for an air test. At30,000 feet the engine failed to meet the time limit for a slamopen from idle check. I returned to base where the flight lineengineer fiddled with a screw and asked me to re-test theaIrcraft. I dId so and had the same result The aIrcraft waswheeled away to the hangar for a complete check, where itwas found that two of the seven stages of the compressor haddisintegrated completely and a further two were so badlydamaged as to be of little use. A loose bolt had caused thedamage.

The narrow track undercarnage took a bit of gettingused to, particularly in crosswind conditions. Whilst at CFS, Iwas training a pilot to G at instructor standard on crosswindlanding techniques. The wind was just within limits and thestudent instruc or (SI) was havmg a bit of a problem. Afterseveral not-so-good attempts, the fuel state dictated a fullstop landing. I told the SI that he was to land and that if he gotinto difficulties I would take over and complete the landing.All went well un il Just after touch down when the SI seemedunable to control the aircraft as it headed for the side of therunway, look over control- and found there was no control.The aircraft charged through the runway ligh s, onto thegrass, then back onto the runway, eventually coming to a haltwell into the country on the other side of the runway. I leaptout of the aircraft (where a white faced SI was mutteringsomething about brandy and three-wheeled jet skateboardsthat didn' ) and found that our Gnat had only two. One mainwheel had apparently dropped off on the final touch down,takmg he brakes wIth it, hence the lack of control. The SIeventually passed the course and became an above averagemstructor

The Gnat's serviceability rate was poor. We used to s artwith 30 + aircraft at first launch, but were invariablyreduced to 20 or less by lunchtime.

Squadron Leader Mike Sparrow also flew the Gnat,both as CO on 02 Squadron at Valley and later as COof 0 4 Squadron of the Central Flying School atKemble. His assessment is:

It was a good high speed advanced flying training aircraft,with complicated electronics and flying control systems. Theroll rate was exceptional, being 210 degrees per second

whatever reason during flying training, and some very, verylow level ejections, but I don't think there was ever onefatality ejecting from the Gnat. The seat was much malignedinitially by industry and some people in the service, but inmy opinion there has never been a better one l

(British Aerospace)

Hawker Siddeley Gnat T.l XP537 '100' of the CentralFlying School at Little Rlssington together with a deHaVilland Vampire T.ll of the same unit around1964--65. The problematical narrow undercarriagetrack can be seen clearly here.

(British Aerospace)

footed fellow - nice chap in those daysl Of course, we hadsuperb maintenance. Whilst I was with the team we neverhad anyone jump out, and we had complete confidence inthe Folland seat. Later, two or three people ejected, and theynever had the slightest problem, everything worked asadvertised. Similarly, Valley had several ejections for

tailplane - very sensitive; and 'manual', electrical operationof tailplane and elevators via stick Therefore instructing inthis aeroplane could have its moments There wereoccasions at Valley, particularly when emergency proce­dures were being taught. Problems arose, not because ofany failure in the hydraulics, but because the teachers wereinstruc ing for the day when there was a failure. One of theproblems wi h the tailplane was that it was very light andsensitive. It was possible on take-off or landing, if one wasn'tcareful, to porpoise quite severely.

In summary, it was a totally delightful aeroplane, andduring the five years I was with the Red Arrows team wenever suffered any major failure, any major accident. Wehad one hydraulic failure in the five years, and I recall oneaircraft which had a persistent niggling brake problem, buton second thoughts it may have been the pilot - a heavy

Yellowjacks aerobatic team of No 4 Flying TraimngSchool at Valley inverted over Holyhead in 1964. Thedisplay team, led by Fl Lt Lee jones, was formed todisplay the RAP's new trainer.

~[JD~D~GlJ ~®[J(Q)~[p)©l©®

~©l\%7~

SpecificationOne 5,340 lb Rolls-Royce/Turbomeca Adour Mk151.Span 30 ft [f3/4 In, length 36 ft 73/4 In, height 13 it 5 In,WIng area 180 sq ft.Empty 7,450 lb. loaded 16,260 lb.Maximum speed 647 mph. InItial climb 6 mIn 20 secto 30,000 ft, range 1,500 mIles, endurance 3 hrs,service ceIlIng 50,000 ft.

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

David Wa kins refers to he aircraf as he 'dreadfulGnat', and explains:

Flying Control Units], and after some time he instructorcame to see what was taking us so long He noticed that thelast team had put the left and right PFCUs in the oppositewings. They went in really easily by comparison withremoval I

At one stage we did some fault finding. This was wellplanned, with linkages or valves disconnected so that wecould reproduce faults. Then we could take the symptoms tothe manuals and correct them first time. This turned out to bequite a bit different to some of he snags I came across later,which were either intermittent or couldn't be reproduced,but nevertheless it was valuable experience.

I spent a short time with the CFS detachment in early 1966.Most people liked the Gnat; fast, agile and easy to maintain. Ipersonally disliked them because every evening I returnedfrom work stained with dye (mainly red and blue) a1a RedArrow I also treated the"LOX replenishing system with thegreates of respect, as I had heard stories tha it could bedangerous If mistreated. During recharging, the airmenwere supposed to wear protective gear, but in practise, ordUrIng a heavy AF/BF or Turnround commitment, onesometimes 'forgot' to put it on.

Cutting corners could lead to dangerous situations.During the summer of 1967 we were given a particularlyheavy flying task with about 60+ serials to fly that day. Wewent into work early to 'Before Flight' all the aircraft. Oneparticular airman was foolishly preparing three aircraft atthe same time, and left the tyre pressure gauge in thecockpit. When the pilot took off and went into loop as part ofhis detaIled aerobatic exercise, the tyre gauge hit the piloton the eyebrow and temporarily knocked him out. Heneeded seven stitches, and the airman disappeared off theunit. Whose fault was it really - the airman's - or thesystem's?

(via Dave WatkInS)

perhaps hay had seen better days. The cockpit was veryhard to squeeze into unless you were a midget, so goodnessknows how the aircrew coped. Once you had got comfythere was the Ejecllon Seat safety handle poking betweenyour shoulder blades to remind you the seat was safe.Al hough a discomfort on the ground it seemed animprovement over all those seat pins in other aircraft, but Ihave only seen this arrangement on the Gnat.

Despite being so low slung and looking so compact, theGnat appeared a bit stranded when jacked and trestled foran engine change. The rear fuselage split at the main enginebearer mounts, quite a common design feature of the time.The flying controls and the brake chute operating cablewere disconnected, and thIS Invariably lef the brake chutes reamed on the hangar floor In a bundle With the rearfuselage wheeled away on a trestle complete wIth fin andtailplane, the engine became exposed. There were wo mainbearers, that looked like small conrod caps; in erestinglythey were made, I think, of carbon-fibre and not steel as Iwould have expected. A previous entry had actuallymanaged to break one of these, and a rather overbearinginstructor laboured on this point so much we felt ratherinsulted. As this- wasn't the first time, we planned ourrevenge. Pocketing the original broken bearer, my team offour 'confessed' to breaking another as we pulled out ourengine Just before tea break. Gloating, our instructorscurri~d off to tell his mates what clowns we were. When we'unconfessed' af er tea, hIS fellow ins ructors rIbbed him somuch that he became half decent towards us.

Once we had to change both aileron PFCUs [Powered

Hawker Siddeley Gnat TI XP504 '04' of No 4 FlyingTraimng School at Valley with aIrman weanngprotective gear WhIlst rechargIng the liquid oxygensystem.

•

T he Hawk started life as another of the manyprivate venture concepts from the Kingstonstables. By 1968, Hawker-Siddeley saw a market

for a cheap tandem-seat basic trainer, to replace suchtypes as the Vampire, Jet Provost, MB.326 and T-33.The type designation HS.1182 was allotted, and anumber of designs were considered. Meanwhile theCentral Flying School had been having similarthoughts, and had put forward proposals for a JetProvost replacement, around which Air Staff TargetAST.397 had been formulated.

This Target adopted new terminology for RAFtraining aircraft, the terms primary and basic beingsuperseded by basic and advanced respectively. Thedesign was to be for an advanced day and nighttrainer, suitable for instruction in formation flying, high­and low-level navigational exercises, and weapontraining. Several options were built into the Target.Flying controls could be either powered or manual, thewings might be either straight or slightly swept, andthere could be either one or two turbojets or turbofans.Seating could be either tandem or side-by-side, but forthe former the forward view from the pupil's seat hadto be 15 degrees below datum, whilst that from the rearseat had to be 5 degrees. Zero-zero ejection seats andan airstream director detector (ADD) were specified,but there was no specific armament provision. It wouldalso be the first British fixed-wing aircraft to adopt themetric (ISO) measurement system.

The Target in the meantime became Air StaffRequirement ASR.397, and the EEC team at Wartonsubmitted their P.59 design. In addition there was

Australian interest from the Commonwealth AircraftCorporation, but in October 1971 the HS.1182 designwas awarded the contract. The variant selected fordevelopment was known as the HS.1182AJ, the 'A'indicating an Adour engine, and the T that it wassubmitted in July (1971).

Orders were placed for one prototype and 175production machines, the first five of the latter beingearmarked for initial use as development machinesbefore being refurbished for RAF service. Theprototype XXl54 made its maiden flight on 21 August1974, powered by a 5,3501b thrust Rolls-RoycejTurbomeca Adour Mk 151, just in time for it to appearat that year's Farnborough Show. By that time it hadbeen named the Hawk T.l, thus abandoning the longtradition of scholastic names for RAF trainers. The flightwas premature, in that full instrumentation was notfitted, but this would have delayed its appearance untilafter the show, leaving this field clear for theFrench-German Alpha Jet.

It demonstrated an excellent rate of climb, goodmanoevrability and an outstanding endurance for itsclass. It was capable of exceeding Mach 1.0 in a diveand, after some modification, developed superb spincharacteristics. There were, however, a number of

BntIsh Aerospace Hawk Tl XX280 of the TacticalWeapons Unit, at Yeovilton in July 1982, fitted with thecentreline 30 mm Aden Cannon and a Matra 155 rocketpod on the starboard wlng.

(Author) shortcomings in its handling characteristics, includingslow aileron and flap operation. To overcome thedifficulties, a number of modifications were made to thewing, after trying various alternatives. To give a goodnatural stall warning, two breaker strips were fitted tothe leading edges of each wing, other additions beingan outboard fence and a series of vortex generators.

By the end of its flight trials the British AerospaceHawk, as it became in April 1977 with the merger of itsparent company, easily met the requirements ofASR.397. Due to the effects in 1974 on British industry ofa 'three-day week' imposed during a fuel crisis,production began about six months later than sche­duled, but thereafter proceeded at a steady pace, thefirst machine (XXI 56) making its maiden flight on 22April 1975. Initial deliveries of 25 machines to 4 FTS atValley began in November 1976, though it was not untiltwo years later that the last of their Gnats departed,except for those flown by the Red Arrows, which werenot replaced by Hawks until 1980. Next to receive thetype was the Tactical Weapons Unit at Brawdy fromJanuary 1978. Poor weather conditions in South Walessoon led to this unit being divided, the Hunter elementbeing detached on 31 August 1978 to Lossiemouth onthe Moray Firth as 2 TWU, the parent unit thenbecoming 1TWU. Deliveries of Hawks to Chivenor

BntIsh Aerospace Hawk Tl XX168 of No 4 FlylngTralnlng School from Valley at Yeovllton In August1985. The wlng fence, which is very evident In thlS shot,was fitted to production Hawks to reduce wlng droprate at the stall.

(Author)

commenced on 1 August 1980, this being by then thenew home of 2 TWU. Losses were few, but noreplacement orders have been placed, despitepost-Falklands optimism that this might be the case.

Painted in the new red and white (or 'raspberryripple') colour scheme, the Hawk made an immediatefavourable impression. It had an impressive rate ofacceleration on take-off, and an excellent turn rate,particularly in low-level flight. The engine was soeconomical that pupils tended to overlook their fuelgauges, but bad weather became much less of aproblem as most UK stations could be reached in theevent of a sudden worsening. Servicing was muchsimpler, and accessibility considerably improved,compared with the Hunter and the Gnat.

The contract for the first 175 machines was a fixedprice one, and a number of items of equipment wereomitted to keep the cost down. There were, for

was the first time you were flymg a real warplane, WIth four30-mm cannon and green-grey camouflage, and It reallydoes 0 like hell ompared WI h the Hawk One hmg aboutthe Hawk, havmg flown i more recently, out of training, ItSair speed is limited. Whereas in iJ Hunter you could do 600knots, lor example, at low level, the Hawk is all getting prettybumpy, and I 's generally no a nice flymg aeroplane at veryhigh speeds (l think 550 knots); i bounces around a lot. edidn' make a habIt of flying at that sor of speed, he fas eswe would y being generally about 500 knots To somebodywho had just done 150 hours on Jet Provosts, however, theHawk is a fantastic aeroplane.

I hink they have lowered the g-hmits now, but he Hawkwas the firs aeroplane I had ever flown where, at the time,you were allowed to pull el her 71/2 or 8 g, and ha wasconSIdered OK You returned from aerobatic sor Ies WI h allthe blood vessels in your arms and legs broken, rather like aprickly hea rash. Lots of people get it you get i in F-15sand F-16s and other hIgh performance aircraf, but therearen't many RAF aeroplanes tha you can do it m, JUs theHawk really. You would go off and do what we call sus amedmax-rate urns. At low level m a Hawk you could eaSIlysustain 6 or 7 g, and you came back completely exhausted.Then about an hour later you would see this rash on theinsides of your arms I remember that fairly distmctlybecause I had never seen It before It always amused mebecause he doctor would say It was all ngh and dIdn't doyou any harm, but I of en wondered

The other thing I particularly remember about flying theHawk at Valley was being totally tired, because you wouldfly maybe two trips a day - a very hIgh mental workload,also physical with all thIS g, and I felt completely creased thewhole time I also remember feeling that I was nearly fallingthe course at eac of the successIVe hurdles, bu overcomingthem each time by just a hairsbreadth and carrying on.

I had a lot of confidence in the aeroplane, I didn't everthink the engine was going to pack up or anything hke that.We didn't like the windscreen, though, because it was nothe armoured ype, and herefore very susceptible to birdstnkes It's the only RAF aeroplane I've ever flown with myvisor down the whole time, which is the recommendedtechnique for all RAF flying, but in aircraft such as Phantomsand Hunter with an armoured windscreen, there's no way abird IS going to come through. I feel that even wearing clearvisors cuts down vision, but in a Hawk, even solo wherethere was no mstructor watching, I would have the visordown because there have been several incidents wherebirds have hit Hawk windscreens and gone straight through.I always felt that was bit of a weak point on the Hawk andmaybe they s ould have stuck an armoured windscreen onit, and accepted the fact that you would have a couple ofextra struts.

One thing I distinctly remember about the Hawk was itsappalling compass system If you used more th n about 30 or40 degrees of bank doing low levels, and went over a ridgeand overbanked 0 keep he altitude, the compass wouldtotally desynchronise. This was terrible, because a a urningpoint you obviously need to use 45 to 60 degrees bank to getthe turn coming round fairly swiftly in a fighter, but then itwould desynch, with the result that you would roll out notreally sure what heading you were on. So you then had to gohrough the performance of resynching it, which isn'tgenerally difficult, just flick a li tie switch, but sometimes it

t01).;~-.l'.; ;

(BritIsh Aerospace)

The difficul y with the Valley course, which is theadvance flying training course, is not that the aeroplane isdifficult to fly, but ra her that the work load you are under isextremely high. For the first time you are flying an aeroplaneat operational type speeds, in low-level navexes, transitingat 420 knots, which is 7 miles a minute, and having to worryabout attacking targets on time. Also, it is not just low level, itis high level into low level, back into high level, and all thetimings are critical. All along the routes the instructors arethrowing wobbhes, like, 'Break right, there's a banditcoming at .. ' Of course there isn't, but you have to go for itand pretend to defeat this imaginary bandit. By which timeyou are a minute or two behind track, so you then have to doa mental calculation and sick the speed up to 460 knots or soin order 0 make the time on targe. I remember theworkload being phenomenally high - I know other peopledid better than I did, but I found it a really high workload,and compared to Jet Provosts a real advance.

Having said that, when I got on to the single-seaterHunter, it was a quantum jump ahead of the Hawk, in that it

mi ute. ThIS was cer ainly not very much compared 0Phantoms and 0 her operational aircraf ,bu a the time it wasdramatic. The aeroplane climbs hke a hft, in that the attitudeappears quite flat, the nose isn't up in the heavens, but theground is just falling away from you.

As a student, not having flown Gnats, I found the controlsterribly sensitlve and hght, though maybe Gnat peoplewould ay the Gnat is hghter. It is a very lovely handlmgaeroplane, and as far as I can remember completelyviceless, whIch IS probably why people refer to it as a JetProvost 'Mk6'. It's not like a Gnat - if you make a screw-upround a finals turn in a Gnat, you will, perhaps, kill yourself;the Hawk has basically a straight wing, which is much safer.

Bnf1sh Aerospace Hawk T.l XX235 of No 4 FlyingTrainIng School at Valley.

When the Hawk first came in, about a year before I wentthrough flying training, a lot of people said it's not hke aGnat, it's hke a Jet Provos 'Mk 6' Personally, when I flew It, Icould no beheve the performance Improvemen over a JetProvost, and I thought, God, there's no way I'm gomg to beable to handle this. On my first trip, which was just afamiliarisation ride sitting in the back seat, I distinctlyremember seeing the rate of chmb indicator go beyond thetop stop, so I guess it was gomg up a about 6,000 fee per

From the QFIs pomt of view, the outlook from the backseat is exceptional; indeed, it is almost possible to forget thatthere is a student in the front seat. This applies whether inthe circui , at low level, or during tail chases. The cockpitsare vir ually Identical with respect 0 the main controls, andthus there are no problems m monitonng students' checks orchanging from one cockpit to another between sortles.

The aircraft has impressive fuel economy. It is possibleto fly a whole hour's sortie and still have diversion fuel for anairfield some 200 miles away - typically Leuchars, up inSco land, is used as a weather diversion from Valley.

The other advantaqe after the Gnat is he hiqh crosswindlimIt, and when one consIders hat the average wind speedon Anglesey is some 15 knots throughout the year, and that'Gale Force 8 in the Irish Sea' means Valley, this is asignificant contribution to the ability to operate the aircraft.

From the point of view of the student and the syllabus,the simple systems and straightforward handling permit thestudent to go solo two sortIes earher than he did m the Gnat,and there IS less emphasis on aspects of pure Hawk flying.This enables the instructor to graduate and control thepressure on students, rather than the aircraft itselfgenerating an unbalanced amount of pressure early on in thecourse ThIS control of the pressure enables the devel­opment of alrmanship and operating a fast jet 0 beeffectIVely controlled by the instructor, never overloadingthe student, but always keeping him at full stretch throughoutthe course

The syllabus is now only 76 hours, which compares veryfavourably with the Gnat, and yet 1 IS now pOSSIble tomclude tactical, formation and more naVIgatIon sor ies whichrange much further, and thus Hawks operatmg from Valleycan be seen in Scotland, East Anglia or the South West ofEngland.'

Mark Hanna gives a pupil's viewpoint of the Valleycourse:

instance no stop watches, no directional gyro in therear cockpit, no standby UHF radio and no standbycompass. The compass system, although suitable forlow performance aircraft, was inadequate for highperformance aircraft using large angles of bank. Thebrakes had ongmally only two plates hough thesehave since been replaced by three plate brakesoffering a higher performance. Although there havebeen various modifications to minor parts of thesystem, the aircraft have remained basicallyunchanged since they were first delivered. A numberof machines have, however, been fi ted with Sidewin­der air-to-air missiles for second lme UK defence, andin this form it is redesignated the Hawk T.IA.

The aircraft has attracted a number of exportorders being fitted out to whatever standard thecus orner requires These are considerably moreexpensive though, than hose of the original RAFfixed-price contract, and an aircraft incorporating allthe latest modifications could possibly cost in theregion of £3,000,000.

Flight LIeu enant Rod King has had considerableexpenence as a Hawk ins ruc or:

I began instructmg on the Hawk in August 1979, havingpreviously been a Gnat and a Jet Provost instructor. Sincethat time I have flown some 2,500 hours on the aircraft in tneadvanced flying trammg. role. At present I am FlightCommander on Standards Squadron. 4 FTS, WhICh IS still atValley Thus I am stlll flymg and instructing on the Hawk.

My first ImpressIons of the aircraft were that the systemswere very simple, and therefore this led to uncomplicatedemergency procedures somewhat m contrast to the Gnat.The aircraft has a hvely response, and requires sensitivehandling The wing of he Hawk IS very cleverly deSIgnedand able to produce a lot of lift at a relatively low speed, andhis contnbutes greatly to the aIrcraft's manoeuvrabihty. Thiswing also has straight-wing behaviour at the stall and at lowspeed, and this enables one to fly the aircraft relativelyeasily m the CIrCUIt

British Aerospace Hawk T.l XX345 'Y' of 0 2 TacticalWeapons Unit at Chivenor in July 1986.

(MAP photo)

•

aircraft are shared by the Helicopter Squadron of theCentral Flying School. The Fleet Air Arm's No 705Squadron, otherwise known as the Helicopter TrainingSquadron, Oles the type at R Air Station Culdrose, asdoes the Advanced Rotary-Wing Squadron of the ArmyAIr Corps Centre at Middle Wallop.

Before looking more closely at the Gazelle, it is

~®[J(Q)~[p)@)liD@)~®

IW®~li~@)mxQ]~@)~®~~®

Specification (HT.3)One 590 shp Turbomeca Astazou lilA.Rotor diameter 34 ft 5.112 in, fuselage length 31 ft 3m, height 10 ft 2lj2 in.Empty 2,022lb, loaded 3,970 lbNever exceed speed 192.5 mph, maximum cruisingspeed 164 mph at sea level economical cruisingspeed 144 mph at sea level, maximum rate of climbat sea level 1770 ft/min, range 416 miles, serviceceilmg 16,400 ft.

Power plant:Dimensions:

Weights:Performance:

The. Gazelle is currently the standard traininghellcopter for all three of the main armedservices. It is operated at RAF Shawbury by

o I Squadron of 0 2 Flying Training School, whose

evil Gardner ells 0 one rather hairy incident:

The MDC (Miniature Detonatmg Cord) of one Hawk had beenstuck to the canopy with what may not have been the righttype of glue Whilst flying in a sunny climate, the cord cameadrift and draped itself around the pilot's shoulders.Considering its normal purpose, which was to blow off thecanopy in an emergency, this must have given him muchfood for thought on the way homeI

back into place due 0 theIr dog-eared and crumpled shapeand mangled fasteners Whereupon a rigger is summoned toeffect a secure panel fit There never being any sparesavaIlable a such times, much galloping to and fromworkbench s ores and the line office to sign up is therigger's 10 The sortIe gets delayed, tempers flare, andguess who gets he blame ...?

The Hawk's designers must have known a thing or twoabout armourers, because they bamshed the Aden gu fromwithin the airframe and hung it beneath the fuselage a fewinches above the ground. I envisaged a new breed of dwarfarmourers beating the bejasus out of this appendage, using anew and shortened version of their ubiquitous screwdriver,and was only fearful that they might set about theundercarriage on their way in.

'Another Hawk oddity was its metrication ew tool kitsh d to be made up. Gone were BSF, UNF and Rolls-Royce'sown l Spanners, sockets et aJ bore the inscription MM. Veryodd l But the engine had parts with AlF threads for variety.

Along with the Hawk came a new multi-purposeservicing trolley. One powerplant provided AC and DCelectrics of varying potential hydraulic power at 3,000 psiand compressed air at any poundage one required. Thiswondrous device replaced the PE (petrol/electric generat­mg) set, the hydraulic rig (a cranky and noisy brute) and thecompressor Type' '. Marvellous - except it didn't bloodywork l After a few minutes of admit edly quiet working, thevolts would fade, or an ominous pool of DMI5 (hydraulic oil)would spread from beneath it. Even the Hawker-trainedexperts couldn't get one to run successfully for more thanfew minutes. Ground eqUlpment specialists spen manyhours tinkering and probing wi hout success. A man from themakers was sent in to spend a few unhappy days poringover the reluctant beast, before slmking away totallydemoralised, os ensibly to summon up reinforcements.

hen lief Brawdy some months later, these new and shiny'wonder machines' were still parked, idle and useless in thecorner of a hangar.

lt came as something of a surprise that the Hawk had agaseous oxygen system, when I would have expected a LOXpack, which would have been lighter. lt would also havebeen more compact and given better endurance. Maybethere remained a stockpile of new and unused oxygenbottles and trolleys at some MU which had to be used up.Our old line. equipment was decidedly workworn andweary, having endured years of adverse weather and harduse at Chivenor before being carted to Brawdy, yet nothingnew appeared on the line when the Hawks arrived, exceptfor the large 'portable rostrums' which were the Hawk'scockpit access steps.

John orris had experience as a rigger on theHawk with 2 TWU at Brawdy:

The Hawk began to arrive at Brawdy in 1978. The initialdeliveries had gone to 4 FTS at Valley. In prepara ion fortheir arrival, a few eople of various aircraf trades hadundergone the manufacturer's course at Kingston. Theywere drawn from the strength of StatlOn Maintenance Flightand were Hunter experienced. As Hawk numbers increased,the few people trained on type were augmented as otherscame from the Kingston course, a few at a time. Evidently theoutput of Hawks was greater than anticipated, as they keptarriving regularly, exceeding the turnover of Hawk-trainedpersonnel. Our fleet of Hunters remained at its originalnumber, flying about the same hours, and requiring hesame scheduled servicing and occasional rectification ofsnags, so the butter of manpower was thinly spread. Somecompromises had to be made, which is how I came 0 gainmy working ex erience on the Hawk.

There was no possibility of me having the manufac­urer's course, being in my last year of service. My smallminor (and minor s ar) team had just turned out a Hun er 6Awell within he allotted llme, and for our efforts we wereallotted a 'Hawk accep ance check' One Hawk-trainedngger was loaned to us for adVIce and assistance, butunfortunately his help was worth no more than the garbledadVIce we got from hIm Using the Volume One and otherAPs, the acceptance check took longer than normal. A shortwhile later however, yet another acceptance check fell to usand this was completed in an acceptable time. Other tasksconcerni g the Hawk fell to me, as more arrived, such as theembodimen of modifications like the fitting of fixed/foldaways opwa ches to the cockpit port side coamings, andmodifications to the toe brake pedals.

I found the Hawk to be well designed for servicing, witheasy access to most components. The cabin pressurisationand conditioning system was built into the upper fuselageand easily removable as a 'palletised' p ck. Wonderful' Thecomponents of the flying control system were accessible andrelatively easy to set up. The undercarriage appearedsturdy with levered (trailing link) legs like the Meteor,making for good 'arrival' absorption. Everything was soclean and new, delving within dark holes did not result inone getting covered with grease and grime. And yet I hadmisgIvings. What I was looking at did not appear nearly astough as the Hunter. I had, and s il have, doubts at theHawk WIll survive twenty-five years of the sor of use theHunter had to contend with

The worst enemies of the access panels are the linearmourers. They remove them then toss them over theirshoulders. They then s and on them, push heavy trollies overthem and finally pound hem back into place using bruteforce and obscenely large screwdrivers (which also serve ashammers, levers, throwing kmves, drain clearers and asspoons to s ir tea) Naturally these mutllated panels will not fit

wouldn't resynch straight away, so there you would go firingoff 10, 20, maybe 30 degrees of error, shall we say ltmcreased the workload drama lcally They do have a bettercompass system in it now, but hIs was m the la e seventies.'

• £

......

useful to look at the background to British militaryhelicopter training. Unlike the Fleet Air Arm, whichformed the first all-helicopter squadron in this country,specifically for training purposes, as far back as 1947,the RAF was comparatively slow to adopt its owntraining programme for helicopters. In the late 1940sand early 1950s RAF pilots were trained either in acivilian flying school by Air Service Training, or by thehelicopter manufacturers, then Bristols and Westlands.Some were also trained by the Fleet Air Arm.

It was not until 1954 that the Central Flying Schoolat Little Rissington began to receive helicopters, thesebeing Westland Dragonfly HC.4s, the first modernBritish-built helicopter to have served operationallywith the Royal Air Force, in Malaya from 1950 onwards.They were followed into service in the training role byexamples of the Bristol Sycamore, Westland Whirlwindand, briefly, the Saro Skeeter. None of these types wasa 'dedicated' training helicopter, being merely adap­tations of operational machines.

It was not until the mid-1960s that a special mark ofhelicopter was built for the CFS, by then based atTernhill. This was the Westland Sioux T.2, and an orderwas placed for 15 of these machines. Prior to this theCFS had employed a small number of borrowed ArmyAir Corps Sioux AH.ls for training purposes. TheSioux, basically the Bell Model 47G built under licenceby Westlands (and by Agusta), was used primarily bythe Army Air Corps for air observation post duties. Thetype was also suitable for training, however, althoughthe basic training of Army pilots at this stage was doneby a special version of the Sioux (also built byWestlands), bearing civilian registrations and operatedfor the Corps by Bristow Helicopters Ltd undercontract.

For a number of years, the training of RAFhelicopter pilots was carried out on the Sioux HT.2 intandem with the turbine-engined version of the

Westland Whirlwind, the HAR.IO. By the late 1960s,however, plans were under way to replace the Sioux ingeneral Army service, and eventually to replace it inthe RAF training programme, together with theWhirlwind. Similarly the Fleet Air Arm was looking toreplace its own obsolescent training helicopters, bythen the American Hiller HT.2 and Whirlwind HAS.7,and gradually all these factors became intertwined.

The Army Air Corps wished to replace its Siouxfrom 1969 onwards, and its thinking was muchinfluenced by the contemporary American 'LOH'programme. This Light Observation Helicopter contesthad involved three designs, the Bell Jet Ranger, theHiller FHIOO and the Hughes 500, the contract beingwon by the latter. Based on the LOH concept, anoperational requirement (OR.3336) for a Sioux re­placement was drafted by the Land/Air WarfareDirectorate.

Sud Aviation was very interested in further UKsales, and accordingly designed a helicopter (theX-300, later the SA 340) for this requirement, even

Facing page, top:RH Gazelle HT2 XW861 '563jCU' ofNo 705 Squadron atCuldrose showing the fenestron tall.

(RNAS Culdrose)

Facing page, bottom:RN Gazelle HT2 XW886 '548jCW' of No 705 Squadronat Culdrose flying over Goonhllly Down.

(RNAS Culdrose)

Below:An Army Gazelle AH.l visiting RAF Wyton around1982

(Paddy Porter collection)

though at that time there was no similar proposal for alight helicopter for the French services. Although theOR was specifically for an Army training helicopter,there was from the outset an interest in a variant of theSA 340 for use as a trainer by the Fleet Air Arm andRoyal Air Force. It was by no means a foregoneconclusion at this stage that Sud Aviation would get theorder, as Hughes were also taking a keen interest witha view to promoting their UH-6/Model 500 in Europe,and for some time competed for this order, withWestlands evaluating the type for possible UKproduction.

Political considerations had now begun to enter thescene, however. Proposals for various joint aviationprojects between Britain and France, of which the

Concorde was another, led to the respective gov­ernments signing a memorandum of understanding on22 February 1967. This covered the joint developmentof three helicopters, the Sud Aviation SA 330 Puma, theSA 340 Gazelle and the Westland WG.13 Lynx. Fromthat time onwards the Gazelle was the undisputedchoice, both as an Army observation/liaison helicopterand, equally importantly, as a basic training helicopterfor all the three major British services, as well as for theRoyal Marines.

This is not to say that there were not manyproblems, both political and technical, while devel­opment commenced and the two manufacturersconcerned began to implement the Joint programmes.At the outset, the potential purchases for Britain and

• 11;) •~....;.::f?

(Paddy Porter collection)

BottomRAF Gazelle HT3s of No 2 Flying Training School atSha wbury around 1984,

(Author's collection)

(IL, Forshaw)

CentreRAF Gazelle HT3 XW858 of the Central Flying Schoolat Shawbury.

Top:RAF Gazelle HT2 XZ933 'T' of No 2 Flying TrainingSchool at Shawbury practiSing a conflned-spacelanding,

It was a smashing aircraft from my point of view as an enginefitter, working in the Base Engineering Flight which was verysimilar to an Aircraft Servicing Flight. In the engine bay wedid services up to and including majors on both the Gazelleand Wessex helicopters, We had four Gazelles in at anyonetime, taking up half of the hangar, with normally a SergeantRigger in charge of each aircraft and a Chief Tech, Rigger incharge of the whole servicing, I was then a corporal, and Iused to enjoy working on the Gazelles far more than theWessexes because to me they were a lot easier to work on,The Astazou engine was perfectly positioned for me, beingat just the right height for me to be able to stand there, takethe covers off and there it was right in front of my face,

Regarding routine work, we used to do primary starservicings and upwards, For an engine fitter on the Gazellesthis would involve a few minor tasks, such as oil filter

pitch, roll and, below 48 knots, yaw, A very characteristiceffect on RAF Gazelles was the distinct kick as one passed 48knots increasing and the yaw channel of the SAS disengaged,

All, however, was not totally benign in terms of handling(is it ever with any aircraft?), Display Dying soon approachedthe limits of the night envelope and two aspects stand out inmy memory, The first was jack stall as it was known; if theaircraft load on the blades exceeded the hydraulic powerthen the controls locked' The aircraft pitched up and rolledright uncontrollably until blade pitch angle was reduced, Aninteresting way to start a display pull-up if a little too spirited I

The second, a rather complex aerodynamic phenomenon,was known as Vortex Ring (or stall) of the Fenestron (tailrotor) This, by conservation of angular motion, led to afurther increase in yaw rate, This divergent situation couldobviously lead to disaster and prevention was very much inorder rather than curel

Nevertheless, with proper handling and observance ofthe rules, the Gazelle is a very safe aeroplane, as its recordshows,

A groundcrew viewpoint is given by SergeantMick Fowen, who Joined the RAF in September 1967 asan A/Tech/P (Aircraft Technician Propulsion), andworked on Gazelles at Shawbury from March 1981 toDecember 1983.

I was a staff instructor with the Central Flying School(Helicopters), where I taught new instructors their skills,Latterly in my time in UK I was the Deputy Chief FlyingInstructor (DCFI) when my Job also encompassed ab Initiotraining, Perhaps, however, my most significant memories ofthe Gazelle's handling came from my two seasons as theRAF's Gazelle display pilot I

The Gazelle was a delightful aircraft to Dy: light andresponsive with well-harmonized controls, Indeed, this couldbe a problem for advanced training, as an able student couldnot be excessively 'loaded' because of the Gazelle's simplesystems and precise handling - hence the need for theWessex I From the instructor's point of view, the Gazelle wasvery pleasant to Dy and precise to handle; engine-offlandings (with practise') were simple and bestowedconsiderable confidence on a student when he was shownthem, Experienced rotary pilots initially found the hover alittle tricky because the Gazelle used to 'sit on its groundcushion' rather delicately, and a 5 ft hover, which intensifiedthe effect, was quite wobbly until one got used to it. Toameleriorate this problem, the RAF introduced the StabilityAugmentation System (SAS) - a limited authority autopilot in

1002) had arrived in France, Initial engine runs broughtto light serious vibration/ground resonance problems,and these were traced to the larger cabin doors fittedon production aircraft. Shipped to Marignane inDecember 1971, XW842 was flown for the first time on28 January 1972, being then retained in France forfurther tests and development work,

These trials continued with subsequent aircraft(XW843/4/5/6/8), The Army's Gazelles were designatedAH, 1, the Royal Navy designation was HT,2 and the RAFhad HT.3 machines, XW847 was the first Army aircraftto be delivered to an Intensive Flying Trials Unit atMiddle Wallop, arriving at the end of April 1973, It wasjoined there by XW849, XW850 and XW851. XW845had been the first HT,2 for the Navy, and XW852 wasthe first RAF HT.3, being delivered to the CentralFlying School at Ternhill on 16 July 1973, Uniquely,there were no separate serial batches for the individualservice machines, all three versions being intermixedon the production line, This was, and remains, anexceptional feature, and serves to emphasise the verysmall technical differences between the respectivemarks,

When the Gazelle was introduced at CFS in 1973,trainees would complete 145 hours fixed wing flying onJet Provosts before going on to Gazelles for 90 hourshelicopter training,

By the time Westlands ceased production inFebruary 1984, they had produced 294 machines, ofwhich 282 were delivered to the various Britishservices, However, production of major Gazellecomponents continued at Westlands for some time forcontinuing Aerospatiale deliveries,

Squadron Leader Barrie Simmonds, nowcommanding a Wessex squadron in Hong Kong,recalls:

• i

France were in the ratio of 600 to 100, and there wasstrong opposition from Britain to both a Frenchairframe and engine - in this case the TurbomecaAstazou lIN, later IlIA, The British would havepreferred the Bristol-Siddeley BS360 (later Rolls-RoyceGem) in derated form.

Perennial arguments also surfaced over size/weight and, of course, costs, The latter were estimatedto have increased from £40,000 per unit to £90,000 perunit by 1969, The dimensions and weights were verysoon much greater than those originally envisaged,and certainly in excess of the LOH concept which hadgenerated the project.

Economic problems generally also caused misgiv­ings, and by 1969 the Army Air Corps order wasscaled down from 600 to 300, Even so, financialconsiderations continued to create tension between thetwo governments, and a revised cost-sharingagreement was reached in May 1970, From that timeonwards, the programme moved forward without toomany problems, either technical or political.

The prototype Gazelle first flew at Marignane on 7April 1967, with the civil registration F-WOFH, Whenthe second prototype, F-ZWRA, flew in May 1968 itincorporated the distinctive 'fenestron', which was tobecome the Gazelle's main recognition feature, Giventhe name because of its window-like appearance, thisinset tail rotor installation was designed so as toachieve a smooth airflow, and as a protection for therelatively vulnerable conventional blades, Other rec­ognition features on the Gazelle are its extensivelyglazed cockpit and a fixed skid undercarriage,

The prototypes were followed by four pre­production models (F-ZWRH/L/l/K), and the third ofthese was allocated to Westlands for UK developmentwork, the serial XW276 being applied followingdelivery to Yeovil on 6 August 1969, After modificationand fitting out to British Army standards it flew again on28 April 1970, and was utilised for manufacturers'development trials at Yeovil and at the Aircraft andArmament Experimental Establishment at BoscombeDown, Although the main development work was,naturally, carried out in France, with feedback to thiscountry, XW276 played a valuable part in eliminatingthe usual teething problems,

The relative size of the British and French ordersfor the Gazelle, by now designated the SA 341 - 300against 100 around this time - meant that the majorshare of production came to Westlands and amountedinitially to 65 per cent of the airframe, Production wasbegun at their main works at Yeovil, but switched in1977 to their factory at Old Mixon, Weston-super-Mare,so as to leave Yeovil clear for Lynx production, TheBritish components for the first production Gazelle(F-WIEP c/n 1001) were delivered to France in late1971, and it made its first flight early the following year.

By this time the first British machine (XW842 c/n

• £ .... VJ .It__I:'_

The Je s ream was originally designed byHandley Page, as a means of staying in businessafter he Government of he day

withdrew is support because they had refused to joineither of he en orced consortiums which even uallycombined to form British Aerospace. The firm hadbeen argely dependent on military orders, culminat­ing in the Victor bomber, and hey found themselves ingrea diffic !ties filling the gap. They at emp ed to keepafloa by undertaking civil aircraf work, and somenon-aviation engineering, but even ually failed andwent in 0 receivership.

~-

re unded from sales profits The first of four proto ypes(G-ATXH) made its first flight a Radlett on 18 August1967 powered by two Turbomeca Astazou XIV engines.The ifth machine (G-AWBR) flew on 21 November 1968wi h Garrett TPE331 engines.

The concept was not altogether unsuccessful, andproduc ion was under way even before he firstmachine had flown. A number of orders werereceived, including eleven Garratt-engined machinesfor he Uni ed States Air Force, but things were nogoing too well. The firm had little experience ofbuilding small aircraft, and was learning lessons in this

'4CU

Above:RAF Jetstream Ti XX495 'C' of No 6 Flying TrainingSchool at Finningley around i984 showing well thecharacteristically neat cowling of the Astazou XViengine.

(Paddy Porter collection)

Below:RN Jetstream T2 ZEiii '574jCU', a late deliverymachine for No 750 Squadron at Culdrose fitted withnose-mounted radar.

(RNAS Culdrose)

The Jetstream was the final hope for their survivalas aircraft manufacturers. I s origin can be raced backto an American-inspired proposal to modernise the deHavilland Dove by replacing its Gipsy Queen engineswith two small turboprops. It soon became apparenttha a major redesign would be required 0 make it intoa high speed jet-engined executive aircraft. Initials udies by Handley Page led to the conclusion hat thedi ficu!ties in achieving he requirements, includingpressurisation, were such hat i would be preferable toundertake a totally new design.

Given the company designation HP.137, devel­opment cos s were estimated to be of the order of threemillion pounds, of which the Ministry provided half, onthe agreement that this would eventually have to be

RAF Jetstream Ti XX498 'F' of No 6 Flying TrainingSchool at Finningley around 1984

(Paddy Porter collection)

ield he hard way. As a consequence the Jetstream notonly slipped behind schedule, but was becomingoverweight. Added to which its appearance coincidedwi h an unexpected in ernational fuel crisis, whichcompletely upse he economics of opera ing such anaircraft, causing potential customers to pos poneorders. This in turn sapped the confidence of themoney markets and, despi e having a potential winneron their hands, Handley Page wen into liquidation.

By this stage, 38 machines had been delivered, and

I was CO of 750 Squadron from 26 October 1976 to 13 July1979, rather longer than is usual, so that I could see theJetstream into service.

I was frankly appalled by the Sea Prince when I tookover - and continued to be so. It was a harsh contrast to myprevious job of flying the VIP HS 125's at Northolt. But in anycase by the mid-seventies, or even the mid-sixties, the SeaPrince had become an aeronautical anachronism.

It was therefore a great pleasure and challenge to takeon the task of introducing the Jetstream into naval service.Unlike the major operational aircraft types, we did notindulge in the luxury of an IFTU (Intensive Flying Trials Unit),of which I had had previous experience with the Phantom.The transition was very much an in-house process betweenthe Squadron and the Observer School at Culdrose, DNAWin London and Scottish Aviation (later to become part ofBritish Aerospace) at Prestwick.

I cannot remember the exact date on which the RNacquired the Jetstream from the RAF, but I think thatfinancially it was a satisfactory arrangement for whichDNAW, in particular the Project Officer Lt Cdr Ian Neale and

Jetstreams went into storage at St Athan, as did those ofthe CFS towards the end of the following year. InJanuary 1976, however, XX496 was sent to 750Squadron, the Fleet Air Arm's Observer TrainingSquadron at Culdrose, for evaluation as a possiblereplacement for the Sea Prince, which they had by thenbeen flying for 23 years.

The RAF were also still interested in the type,however, and on 25 November 1976, XX497 went toLeeming as the first of eight (later 11) T.ls for theMulti-Engine Training Squadron (METS) attached to3 FTS, until being transferred in 1979 to Finningleywhere its allegiance was changed to 6 FTS. The Navy,in the meantime, had decided on the Jetstream forCuldrose, subiect to certain modifications, and 14aircraft were given a special refit to bring them up toT.2 standard, the first being delivered to 750 Squadronin October 1978. Two more T.2s were later delivered,then in 1986 the squadron received four new T.3s,these having their radar in a bulge under the centresection instead of in the nose.

At Finningley, although technically part of 6 FTS,METS largely operates quite separately from theparent unit. After having completed a basic trainingcourse on Jet Provosts, pupils undertake the 20-weekAdvanced Training course, which includes 45 hourssimulated flying on the ground, and 47 hours practicalflying in the Jetstream, including four night sorties.Training flights are made to such places as Cranwell,Waddington and Topcliffe. Re-training courses are alsogiven to pilots withdrawn from helic012.ter or jet fightertrammg, whether for medIcal or unsUltablllty reasons,these being known as MEXO (Multi Engine Cross­Over).

Commander Neville Featherstone was heavilyinvolved with the introduction of the Jetstream intonaval service in replacement for the Sea Prince:

his boss Cdr Dusty Miller, deserve credit. The aircraft hasproved, I think, to be a satisfactory flying classroom. Therewill always be arguments about whether helicopterobservers should train in a fixed-wing aircraft which canoperate up to 25,000 feet and at more than double helicopterspeeds. The principal argument in favour of fixed wingaircraft is their comparatively low operating costs. From thepilot's point of view, the Jetstream was a great step forwardin terms of performance and modern equipment, including acomplete airways-type avionics fit.

Reverting to personal reminiscences, I see from my logbook that I spent October 1977 at RAF Leeming convertingonto the RAFs Jetstream T.Mkl with the METS (Multi-engineTraining Squadron). This armed me with the necessaryknowledge' and experience of the aircraft to get thingsgoing.

The ten or so ex-RAF aircraft were taken out of storageand returned to Prestwick for refurbishing and modificationto the Observer training role. Our major task was the designand installation of a Radar/Navigation console, two of whichwould fit comfortably in the spacious cabin. Lt Cdr MikeBoumphrey, the Chief Instructor at the Observer School, andI, spent considerable time on this design and in specifyingthe instruments and navaids with which it should be fitted.TANS was one of the better navaids that we stipulated,especially as it is fitted in the Lynx and ASW Sea Kinghelicopters. The radar, however, was less of a success sinceit did not really equate to the Sea King's radar either indisplay or performance. Outwardly the bulbous radome wasan aesthetic disaster which quite spoiled the lines of anattractive aircraft'

A year after my Leeming conversion I spent a few daysat Prestwick flying the T.Mk2, the naval version, under thesupervision of Captain Houston, Chief Test Pilot (I suspect theonly TP) for Scottish Aviation.

26 October 1978 was the big day when the first aircraftwas handed over to the Navy. There was an impressiveunveiling ceremony in the hangar at Prestwick, Vice AdmiralSir Desmond Cassidi, the then Flag Officer Naval AirCommand, being principal guest. After the ceremony I thenflew XX481 down to Culdrose with the Admiral on the jumpseat. Mike Boumphrey demonstrated all the goodies in theback to other VIPs, and Lt Cdr Ned Stone was co-pilot.Although it was early evening when we arrived, we did acouple of passes across the airfield to show off the shiny newtoy Unfortunately my landing was less than perfect and Iuttered a considerable expletive; the Admiral remainedpoker-faced.

Meanwhile pilot and staff observer training was alreadywell under way. We set ourselves the task of keeping thestudent pipeline churning through at maximum capability onthe Sea Prince, although many aircrew were undergoingJetstream conversion at Leeming. The maintainers, too, in theshape of Airwork Ltd and Chief Engineer David Rollo, took itall in their stride. With the exception of one small reductionin one student course, we fully met the task.

My logbook tells me that the last student training sortiein the Sea Prince was on 1 May 1979, but before that thestudents had already started on the Jetstream Notsurprisingly, they found the new aircraft a quantum jump inall directions, and the navigation equipment was clearlyoverwhelming. Indeed some navaids were not madeavailable to them until the final stages of their course. The

• i:fFiI'~_.l,f.

(Marion Hamilton)

service version, the Jetstream Series 201, wasdesignated the Jetstream T.l, and XX475 first flew assuch at Prestwick on 13 April 1973.

The military version was fitted with the morepowerful Astazou XVI engines, which improvedperformance, and met the RAF's needs for higheroperating weights. XX475 was flown to the CentralFlying School on 26 July 1973, to be followed by severalothers of its type. Then on 12 December 1973 XX479was delivered to No 5 Flying Training School atOakington as the first Varsity-replacement.

The intention was that pilots, after completing 145hours training on Jet Provosts, would undertake an80-hour multi-engine course on the Jetstream. Onceagain, however, politics entered the picture. ADefenceReview resulted in a considerable reduction in RAFpilot requirements for multi-engine turboprop aircraft.5 FTS disbanded on the last day of 1974, and its

RAF Jetstream T.2 XXSOO 'H' of No 6 Flying TraiIllngSchool at FJnningley around 1984.

components were available for a further ten. Thesewere taken over by a firm known as Jetstream Ltd,which in turn was bought in 1972 by Scottish AviationLtd on the understanding that an RAF order would beforthcoming. Despite the fact that the latter firm, likeHandley Page, were outside the two consortia, theywere allowed by the Government to undertake militarywork, and orders were placed for the Jetstream, andthe Bulldog primary trainer which they had taken overfrom the liquidated Beagle company. No doubt the factthat it was a Scottish-based company was a factor in thisdecision.

The Procurement Executive of the Ministry ofDefence had in fact been seeking a replacement for thenow elderly Varsity, and they wasted no time in takingadvantage of this new situation. On 27 June 1972,Specification number 283 D&P was issued for thedevelopment and production of the Series 200 variantof the Jetstream to meet Air Staff Requirement numberASR.398 for a bac;ily-needed twin-engined crew trainer.An order was placed for 26 aircraft, the first beingXX475, a conversion of AWVJ, built as a civil machine,as were several early machines in the order. This

•

(RNAS Culdrose)

In March 1985, after much poli ical dispute andlobbying, the British Government placed an orderfor an anglicised version of the Brazilian

Embraer EMB-3l2 Tucano, as a replacement for thenow ageing Jet Provost. The British version, of which130 are being built, is fitted with an American 1,100 shpGarrett TPE33l-l2B turboprop, buil under licence byRolls-Royce.

The official requirement, Air Staff Targe numberAST.4l2, had been for an inexpensive high-

performance urbo-prop rainer. Changing from purejets to turbo-props was seen as the best means ofreducing the rapidly escalating cost of turning a recruitinto an operational pilot, already around £2.5m. It wasalso decided to rever from he long fashionableside-by-side seating to tandem sea ing, the view beingtaken tha a s udent would more quickly develop thenecessary skills and attitudes req ired for fastoperational aircraft - and his instruc or would find ousooner whether he was unlikely to do so.

SpecificationOne 1.100-shp Garrett TPE33l-l2BSpan 37 ft 0 ]fl, length 32 ft 4 in, height 11 ft 2 in, wingarea 208 sq ft.Empty 4,447 lb, fully loaded 5,842 lb.Maximum speed 280 TAS at 15,000 ft, CrUiSing speed252 mph, initial climb 5,100 ft/min, range 1,200 miles,endurance 3.5 hrs, service ceiling 35,000 ft.

Weights:Performance:

Power plant:Dimensions:

an engme down by mistake I

On landing, too, the throttles had to be closed with a finesense of timing - too early and the blades went to flight finepitch, the aircraft ceased moving forward and movedabruptly dow_nwards onto the tarmac. But once on therunway, selection of reverse pitch was always a goodpllot-pleaser as the aIrcraft ]uddered to a halt in anmcredibly short distance

Finally it is worth mentioning that, apart from a cadre ofexperienced fixed-wing pilots, the bulk of the squadronpilots came straight from helicopters (via a short Sea Devoncourse) to the Jetstream They coped admirably and it wasalways a pleasure when the best amongst them used thisback-door entrance to the fixed wing world m order tograduate to the Sea Harner

RNJetstream T.3 ZE438 '576', fitted with 940 shp GarrettTPE 33l-lOUF engines, soon after delivery to No 750Squadron at Culdrose in May 1986.

aircraft was infinitely more comfortable than the whale-likeinterior of the Sea Prince. Goon suits, bonedomes andparachutes had given way to shirtsleeves, lightweightheadsets and coffee at one's elbow

Later m May 1979 we took SIX Jetstreams down toGIbraltar vIa Porto, returning vIa Hyeres. The followmgmonth we proved the route to Berlm for a long weekendThe morale of the students perked up nollceably with theseforeign jolhes, even if they had little clue on the intricacies ofaIrways flying. These and similar trips are now well­established features of the Basic Observer Course

Fmally the aIrcraft itself probably the most significantthing the pIlot had to get used to was the Astazou XVIturbo-prop engme dnvmg a fairly large reverse-prop. Theengme was baSically that which powers the Gazellehelicopter, but the Jetstream versIOn IS encumbered wIth allsorts of electrically operated safeguards, mlcroswitches,interlocks etc. The result was a complex engine to handle;when it went, it went very well mdeed, like the proverbialsewmg machme, but speeded up to somethmg like55,000 RPM If It malfunctiOned It could prove difficult totroubleshoot! Ir: testmg the vanous safety deVices on theground, pnor to take-off, It was embarrassmgly easy to shut

Appendix 1 U[J@OmJ®[J(C(Q)mJ1t[J@©1t

~ [p)®© O~O ©@1to (Q) mJ~

temperatures in Brazil were preventing the enginefrom delivering full power, The aircraft was thereforedisman led, cra ed and airlifted back 0 Belfast by aHeavylif CL-44 on 29 March 1986. 1 was reassembledin ten days at he Shorlac faCIlity, and test flown on 11April. Eventually the TPE331-10 engine was replacedby the standard TPE331-12B which has a number ofrefinements, including an electronic engine controlunit. The new engine resulted in additional torque, butthis was only significant if a 30 knot crosswind from thenght happened 0 be experienced during full-powerrun up against he brakes when, ini ially, here wassome tendency for the starboard wing to lift. Providingthe propellor with a nega ive torque system facilitatedfeathering in the event of an engine failure,

Fitting the Garrett engine produced differentspinning characteristics from the original Pratt andWhitney-engined version. Lef -handed spins were nearto the claSSIC mode a turn of abou 3-4 secondsduratIOn resul ing in a loss of around 500 feet inaltltude. A spm in the opposite directlOn was rathermore nose down, and herefore slightly quicker.Recoveries were no problem, full opposite rudderbeing applied and the control stick eased gently off thesop. Inverted spin capabilities were also good.

After completing its manufac urer's rials ZFl35was flown to Boscombe Down for service assessmenand final clearance. The second Short-bUilt machine,ZFl36, made its first flight without incident on 10 March1987, and by the following month the first threeproduction aircraft were all at Boscombe Down, One ofthese is being flown by a Tucano Course Design Teamto devise a new basic syllabus for he type, Furtherproduc ion is initially planned at he rate of 30completed machines per year, but there is potential todouble this if export sales are for hcoming, In additionto the firm RAF order for 130 machines, there is anoption for 15 more.

Boscombe Down trials were due to end bymid-September, and Shorts are optimistic that, after allthe work they have put into redesigning the aircraft tomeet he s iff RAF requirements, no fur her drasticchanges will be necessary. The first service aircraftought herefore to be delivered shortly afterwards tothe Central Flying School at Scampton, where RAFinstructors will start to gain experience on the newtype, By the summer of 1988 at least 30 productionmachines should have been delivered, and within five

Shorts Tucano T1 ZFl35, the first production machine,(Shorts)

years the Jet Provost will then have been graduallyreplaced at CFS, 7 FTS Church Fenton, 1FTSLinton-on-Ouse and the RAF College at Cranwell. All ofthese stations gained their first real sight of their newmount in mid-July 1987, when '007' spent several daysvisiting each of hem, as well as calling at RAF Wytonfor the benefit of nearby Suppor Command Headquar­ers as Bramp on.

The Shorts' sales organisation is now very busyseeking possible overseas orders, though inevitablythis takes time, Interest has been expressed, forinstance, by the RNZAF, which needs to replace itsStrikemasters by abou. 1989. Due to the dras icredesigning 0 meet stiff RAF requirements, Shorts'version of he Tucano is very different from itsEmbraer parent, and is herefore seen as likely tointerest a different class of cus orner.

Allan Deacon says:

The effect of installing the Garrett engme has proved whollybenefiCial In the words of an experienced RAP mstructor"ThiS aircraft IS gomg 0 put the fun back into trammg' Thetorque effect has mcreased, but dlrec lOnal stabihty is sogood that a slam acceleratlOn can be made at thresholdspeed on 'Go round' with the feet off the rudders, and only asmall amount of aileron is required to keep the wings levelin the ensuing side-slip, Power response is linear and thewhole unit is exceptionally smooth It is only during largepower increases at speeds below 150 knots that the pilot isconscious of the propellor and torque effects, The stallmgcharactenstlcs have been described by a CAA test pilot asImpeccable

Unlike many preVIOUS RAP tramers, the ailerons remameffective m the conventional sense, with inner wing fullystalled, and even if the stick is held fully back the nose willeventually drop, The spinning characteristics both erect andmverted, are shghtly different .from the Embraer 312, duepossIbly to the fixed shaft turbine and four-bladed propellorm the place of the free turbme and three blades, butrecovery remams just as Immaculate,

One of the virtues of the aIrcraft apparently is that whilstIt IS extremely lively with very rapid response to controlinputs, it has a very pleasant instrument f1ying platform, Adraft Operating Data Manual has already been submitted tothe customer and bettering specification performancerequirements are expected.

NumberA 2(d:: 24='A 2:'

3: 2';525302632712'284 295293363C'l3115 31

17 31183121 3123'31832123224322532R32

;; 337332633133424 342613432 347 35835336036

2336243640136T 1'37

n 37283737 37T 3937

40(37T 438

16382938

DesignsBAT BaboonF:oat seaplane nC' IssuedFlOd' seaplane B,ackburn Sprat Parnal.Perch Blciers VendaceAvro 50';:\Avro 504. wtth GnomeBnslol F 2b (dual c'mtrolAvro 504'J updateAlmsllong Whltwolih Atlas ,dudl control)De Havtlland Gipsy MothHawker TomtitAvro 621 Tu orAvro "04'J productionArmstrong Wr.J!'North A:,as dLa. controlDe HavI:Jand Moth II r.ot Issued ,eplacedby 23 31Westland Wapttl VIAvrc Tutor succeeaed by 25 32Fairey tllF Mk llIBroC,De Havtlland Tiger Moth IHawker Hart TramerBnstol B IIdog T'Falrev Seal (TAvro'621B Tutor fu.l prod ctlanAvro 6'; Seatu'orDe Hav:.land TIger ~IOlh ~oat se.planeWes::ar.d allace TDe Hav,lland T:ger ~Iolh II producllOnBnstol Bulldog TAvro 621B Tutor production (Lynx IV1Avro 646 SeatutorAvro 626 PrefectDe HaVilland Tiger MOlh II prod CllonHawker Hart T productionAvro Anson T nat proceeded wtthSmg:e seal traIner DH Don I.esKestre. (Pnvate ventL:re [Other deSigns

Avro 676 677]Airspeed OxfordMtles MentorMiles MagisterAb milia tramer Heston JA 3 HestonJA 6 Parnell 382 DeSigns not bUiltAirspeed AS 36 Fairey General AlrcrafGAl 32 Mtles M 15 Percival P20spec;[lcatlon not proceeded '/I'h

Hawicer Hmd TDe Havtlland DH 86B for E&\\'SMiles MagiS er I productionAirspeed Oxford I production for 'JewZealandAirspeed Oxford I production for RAFTWIn·engmed tramer ,not pr lceededwtthMiles Master IDe HaVilland DH 89A Dommie I w:oeless'ramer

T04 4uT 941

1343BRT 21 43

r45

2r 46P

21 46P

T 2446

T2" 46

T 264647 46PT I 47T I 472TIl 47T 14,47T 14 47 3T 848T 1248T 1348T 16 48

T 1748T I 49T 149"T249T 3 49T 17 49T IIIPT IIIP2T 118PT 117D&PT 12ID&P

T l30D&PT I.;7T

Twm·engmed traIner and commUnicationsn ' proceeded WlltAirspeed Super Cou::e,De HavrJand DH 98 Mosqu,' 'r lI~er nc'l'[cceeded w;'nAnspeed AS:'9 Lgh:er '[amer rd"cel.edPercival Proctor Improved netproceeded wilhBnstol BuckmdstelF,mey Spearflsh dual control tramerc,mcelledElementary '[dIner PerCival P,en::ceDeSigns nor bL:lll DH I " Hes·or. IC I, hies ~I 13Advanced Ir.;ner Avrr: Athena Bou;lilnPaul BaI:lol DeSigns not bUilt Bldckburr.B52 Mt,es M 7'PerCival Prentice T I PerCivalproduclionPerCival Prentice T I 'BlackburnproduclionAvro Anson T XX 0verseas nav:ga'Jonal'ramerAvro Anson T?l ~ome r.d':rgat, na,'ramerAvro Anson T t. r.d10 'rdlnerAvro Al~ena T 2 pr0du:';onGloster Meteor T 7Gloster Metenr T 8B345 tramer ~replaced by T L 49)Avro Athena T 2. Boulton P.lUl Balltol T 2Boulton Paul Balltol T 2 produclionDHC I Chipmunk T 10Weslland Wyvern T 3\'IC 'ers V,usI:y T ISmg.e·engmed bastc :ralner HPRPerCival Pr~vost Deslans nco bUl.l AI'Service Tralnmg Amech Auster A 9Avro Blackburn & General B80 Bou:l0nPaul Chnslea de HaVilland EEC ElitoilsFairey Folland General Aircraft HestonMiles Planet Portsmouth AVlalionS~otlish AVlalion Sltngsby WestlandFairey Pnmer\'Ickers Valeria T 3Vlciers V le"ol T 4EEC Ca~berra T :,Avro Anson ~ymg classroom cance:ledPerCival Sea Prmce T IDe HaVilland Vampire T IIDe Holvilland Sea Vampire T 22F4 48 tramer (cancelled'Fairey Gannet T 2PerCival Pembro 'e C I navigalionalIramer not proceeded WI hHandley Page Readmg Marath~n T IIAdvanced 'eo 'ramer no' proceeded ;vllt

~·..y-ait/

706 t7 a c

Bristol Buckmaster T.ISenalsRPI22 156 170 215 228 246 100 ac VA359 368In a e Total 110 il e

Ma:n unlts'28 OCU EmpITe CenITal Flymg School

De Havilland MothSenalsJ8C30 8U 3 a e J8816 8821 6 a'e J9103 91tl (\9a e )9922 932 (II "e KII 03 1112 (\ L <1 e K11981227 30 il r KI825 I 07 83 a c) Total 162 a etam Unt s

5FTS Central Flymg SChOllI

De Havilland Tiger MothSenalsK2567 "0 I 35 a e K4242 ·P91 50 ,1 e L69"6949 30 a c 'i5444 :;';93" il e 'i6443 6490 651

6556 >;<;76 6625 6630 6674 67C6 6755 67/68126834 688269C'O 69496962 6988 4JUae,'i9114 9162 9172 9215 9238 9279 9306 93-199367 9410 9427 946·1 9492 9523 (300 a c1 R47484797 481C 4859 4875 4924194J 4989 5005 504!505" 5086 5100 5149 5170 5219 5236 5265 (400a e T5360 5384 5409 5433 5454 55'3 5520 55645595 5639 5669 5718 5749 5788 5807 5856 5877

5921 5952 5986 o02e 6C49 6094 6138 61586202 6225 6274 6286 6320 6362 6406 6427 64716485 6534 6547 6596 6612 6656 6671 6720. 6734

6778. 6797 6831 6854 6878 6897 6921 69426991 7011 70557085 7129 7142 7191 7208 72477259 7308 7325 7369 738·1 7418 7436 7485 7509

7553 7583 7627 7651 7700 7723 7757 77777821 784:J 7884 7899 7948 796 8009 8022 SO 63096 8145 8166 821 8230 8264 2000 a e OEI3I198. 192 224 236 284 297 323 336 379 394 432415 490 507 535 519 589 603 64~ 654 697 709

747 76! 791 808 856 870 904 919 957 9699990FlII 1:;9 173 211'75l ,1 C EM?' 7567718[9 835 884 893 031 943 ~3~ 2'2 1 C 'iLn"735 718 789 802 8;7 '59 "98 "oj q·l~ 96 99.' 112 158 171 14 351 a c PG614 658671 116728 746 illO a e TC·dl.]698 a e, lam UnttsRAF I 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 I! 16 17 18

1920212224252628 29 EFTS I 236.7 10 II 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2431 32 33 34 35 38 4213 46 47 48 50 56 E& RFTS 4 5 6 10 FlS 4 FTS Centra' Fi'llngSchoo: RAF College I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101\ 12 13 1\ 15 16 17 18 19 22 23 24 25RFS

FAA 727 Squadron

De Havilland Dominie ISenalsR5921 5934 14 a c R9545 9564 20 a e X73207354 7368 7417 7437 7456 7482 7525 149 a eHG644 674 689 732 75 a e );F847 896 50 c. R669 7~1 713 756 769 815 828 853 150 a cRL936 946 II a c Total 469 a cMain units2E& S24RSI2SS

De Havilland DonSenalsL2387 ,436 50 a c 'ione used as tralr.et s

De Havilland Mosquito T.3SenalsH)851 899 49 a c HJ958 999 42 a c LR516 541553 585 (59 a c RR270 319 (50 a c TV954 984TWIOI 119 50 ct c \'A871 894 923 928 3C a e\'P342 355tl4ac \'R330 349 10° n581 :;%604 631 ;1 a c Tc'al 358 a cMain UnttsRAF b 13 16 51 54 60 1320TU 1655 MosqUito

Tr,lInIng Unlt 204 AFS 226 228 231 2370CUCentral Flying School

FAA 7" ';90 Squadrons

De Havilland Vampire T.lISenals

'Z414 3l 446 478 493 521 544 593 607 674147 a c X0375 405 424 463 506 554 588 627160 a C XE816 823 848 897 919 961 975 998135 a C) XH264 278. 292 330 357 368 166 a CI

X) 77 I 776 (6 a c) XK582 590 623 637 (24 alc) Total538 a'cMain unltsI 3 4 7 8 10 FTS RAF College 226 ~2 233 OCU?n2 206 208 AFS Cer.tral Atr Traffic Control SchcolCenlral Flying School Central 'iavlgatIon and ControlSchool

De Havilland Sea Vampire T.22SenalsXAIOl 131 152 172 52 a c XG742 748 765 77720 a c Total 72 a c

Main UnttsFAA 71" 718 7Z7 736 759 Squa rons

De Havilland Chipmunk T.lOSenalsWB549 588 600 635 638 662 665 706 709 739713 768 (200 a c W0282 310 318 338 344 365.37G 397 100 a c WG271 289 299 336 348 364392 .]32 457 4QI 150 a c 'K5C 523 5~7 5916 7 6j1 \00 a c \\,P772 511 828 '72 893 930~62 088 150 a c 'Z845 884 40 a c Tota: 740 a c~lalr. ~nlts

RAF I 2 3 4 5 BFTS 5 FTS I 2 3 5 6 8.9. IL II12 14 15 17 18 19. 22 23. 24 RFS RAFCollege Central Flymg School UntversllY AirSq a rons A;r Expenence Fli hts Flyl gSelectIon Squadron

FAA BL:annlil Fltgh'

De Havilland Dominie T.ISeflalsXS709 714 726 739 (20 alc)Main unllSI A~S b FTS

EEC Canberra TASenalsWEI88 195 8 d c WH839 -l5C 12 d c W)857 88\25 a c WT475 !92 18 a Cj XH583 584 (2 a c)

XK647 650 (2 a c Total 67 a/cMain unll231 2320CU

EEC Lightning T.4/T.5Ser:a sT4 X 1966 97·1 987 997 20 a c)T5 XS416 423 449 46L (20 a/C) XV328 329 (2 a,c)Total 22 a'eMam unllSLlghmmg Conversion Untt Llgh nt g Trammg Fltght2260CU

Fairey II1F MkIIlM (DC)SenalsSI454 1463 \0 a c)Mam UnttSeaplane Tralntng Fltght

Fairey II1F MkIIlB (DC)SenalsSI845 1851 7 a r

Main unttsRAF Base Leuchars I rTS

Fairey Battle (T)SenalsP6616 6645 6663 b692 6718 6~37 6750 6769 100a CI R7356 7385 7399 7448 7~61 7480 I '0 a C

\'1201 1250 1265 128G 66 a c Tota. 266 a cMam Untts I 7 II 12 16 FTS 4 78 11B&GS 4 5 IGAOS 3 AGS

Fairey Firefly T.7Senals

WJI54 174187 209(44ac WK348 37326acWM761 779 796 809 811 822 824 832 855 86419 71 ac Toal141 ac

Main unllsFAA 719 75r 765 796 Squadror.s

Fairey Gannet T.2SenalsXA508 530 23 a c XG869 881 13 a c

am UnJ~S

FAA 719 737 Squadror.s

Fairey Gannet T.5SenalsXG882 890 ,9 a cMam UnitFAA 849 Squadron

Gloster Grebe (DC)Senals]7519 7538 21 a cMam UnitCentral Flymg School

Gloster Meteor T.7SenalsV 410 459 47e 489 70 a c, VZ629 649 (21 a c)WA590 639 649 698 707 743 '137 a c WF766795 813 862 875 883 '89 alc) WG935 950 961999. WHI12 136 164 209 215 248 160 a C) WL332

381 397 436. 453 488 (126 a/c) WN309 321 (13alc) WSI03 117 140 141 (17 aic XF273 279 (7 a/c)Total 640 alcMam UnitsRAF 202 203 205 211 215 AF 226 2290CU 4

12 211 FTS Central Flymg School FighterCommand Ins rumen Trammg School

FAA 728 759 Squadrons

Gloster Javelin T.3SenalsXH390 397 432 447 24 a C) XK577 I a c) XM336 (Ia/c) To al 26 a cMam Units228 OCU Fighter Command Instrumen Rat:ng chool

Handley Page MarathonSenalsXA249 278 30 alcMam Unl SI 2 A~S

Hawker TomtitSenals)9772 9782 (II a/c. K1448 1452 (6 alc) K1779 1786(8 a/c) Total 25 alcMam Units3 FTS Central Flymg School

Hawker Hart TrainerSenalsK2474 2475,2 a c K3146 315813 alc) K3743 3763(21 a'c) K4751 4770 (20 a'c). K4886 5052 167 alc).K5784 5897 (114 a/c) K6415 6550 (136 a/c). Total 473alcMam nilSI 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 FTS CentralFlyIn School RAF College

Hawker Hind TrainerSenalsL7224 7243 (20 a/C. Plus conversIOnsMain unllSI 5 6 10 I I 12 14 FTS

Hawker Sea Fury T.20SenalsVX280 292 297 310 27 alc) VZ345 355 363 372(21 alc) WE820 826 (7 alc) WG652 656 (5 a/c) Total60 a'cMam unttsFAA 736 738 759 Squadrons

Hawker Hunter T.7SenalsXL563 579 581 :;K6 587 591 597 60(' 601 605 609623 45 a eMam unlls229 OCU I I TWU

Hawker Hunter T.aSenalsXL580 582 584 585 598 599 602 604 IJ 0 a cMam UnitsFAA 738 759 764 Sq adrons

Hawker Siddeley Gnat T.lSenalsXM691 698 704 709 (14 a/e) XP500 516. 530 542/30 alc) XR534 545 567 574 (20 alc) XR948 955976 987 991 999 XSIOO 111 (41 a/c)Total 105 ale

am un s4 FTS Central Fly ng School

Hawker Siddeley Harrier T.2/T.4SenalsT 2 XW264 272 (9 a/c) XW925 927 (3 ale) Total 12alcT4 X 933 934 (2 a C) XZI45 - 147 (3 alc) ZB600606 f7 ale) Toral 12 alcMal unll2330CU

Hawker Siddeley Hawk T.lSenalsXXI56 205 017 266 278 327 339 363 175 a c\Malr. Units4 FTS I T\'U

Hiller HT.ISeflalsXB474 481 513 524 (20 a c)Mam unllFAA 705 Squadron

Hiller HT.2SenalsXSI59 17" I; a c XS7Main unttFAA 705 Squildron

Hunting Percival ProvostSer:a.s'V41~ 448 47 514 53" 580 601 648 660 686

20C a c WW381 398 ~17 453 55 a e XE506 (Ia c XF540 565 591 614 (50 a c XF678 693 '16a/C, XF836 854 868 914 ~66 a c Total 388 a/cMam unllsI 2 3 6 FTS Central Flymg School Central. aVlgallonand Control School RAF College

Miles Magister ISerialsL5912 6001 91 a c L6894 6913 6915 6916 6918­6919 (24 a c' L8051 8095 8127 8176 8200 82378249 82958326 8359 (214 a/c) N2259 (I alc) N3773

3817 3820 3869 3875 3914 3918 3945 39513991 204 a c, 'i4557 I a c 'i5289 5438 (50 a C)

P21SO I a c P2374 24'.lO 242 2470 2493 2510100 a c P6343 6382 6396 6124 6436 6~66 100

a C) RI810 1859 1875 1924 1940 1984 (145 a cT9669 9708 9729 9768 9799 9848 9869 9918 9943

9982 VI003 1042 1063 1102 (300 a/c). Total 1230alcMam Untts3 4 8 14 15 19 23 25 26 27 28 29 30 39 40;3 4445 E&RFTS 5 8 15 16 21 24 29 30 EFTS 2 4 5 6 710 FlS 16 P SFTS Central Flymg SchOOl EmpireCemra\ Lying School

Miles MasterSenalsMk I N7408 7457 7470 7515 7534 7582 75977641 7672 7721 7748 7782 7801 7846 7867 7902

.ei.-t__* J

Glossary7921 796P 7985 8022 8041 8081 9003 9017 (SOCa c' T8268 8292 8317 8351 8364 8m 8429 84698482 850: 8538 8581 8600 8640 8656 8694 8736

8784 8815 3555 8876 8885 400 a c TOlal 9ar a cM~ II T8887 8923 8948 8967 8996 9:'37 (99 a cW9004 9039 050 9099 86 a c AZI04 143 156185 202 226 245 289 306 34J 359 383 408 457470 504 519 563 582 621 638 672 693 742 i73

817 832 856 (525 a c) DK798 - 843 857 . 894 909957 963 994 DLlII 155 169 204 216 2562:'1309 324 373 395 435 448 493 510 5461500 a cDU94 803 821 866 878 909 .35 983 DMI08140 155 196 (212 a c D 1200 245 258 295 312361 374 407 423 454 (200 a c EM258 304 317355 371 409 (125 a C) Total 1747 a cMK III W8437 8486 8500 8539 8560 8599 86208669 8690 8739 8760 8799 8815 8864 8880 89098925 8974 8990 9003 (414 alc) DL552 585 599648 666 713 725 753 767 793 (188 alC, Total 602a/cMaIn UnItsRAF 5 7 9 17 (P)AFU 5 FTS I 5.8 9 16 SFTS I

5 GTS Central FlyIng School 2. 3. 7 10 FISFAA 736 759 760 761 762 794 Squadrons

North American HarvardSenalsMk I N7000 7199200 a c P5783 5982 (200 a c)Total 400 a cMk II AHI85 204 '20 a c A)538 987 450 a c BDI30

137 '8 a c BJ410 ,12 415 (5 a c) B5808 I a c,BWI84 207 24 a C) DG430 439 442 444 (J3 a c,TOlal 521 d cMk IIA EXIOO 846 m a C)M liB FE267 999 FH I00 166 180C a c FS66 I 999FTI 460 70Cac FXI98 497(300ac KFIOC 999(9UO a c, To al 2700 a cMk III EX847 999 EZlOO 258 312 a c EZ259 458(200 a cj FT955 974 (20 a c KE305 309 5 d C Total537 a cMalr. unitsRAF I 2 3 4 5 6 :' 9 10 12 14 1<; 16 17 I 20

21 22 FTS 2 3 6 II FlS I 2 1 6 7 10 15 1617 22 SFrs 5 9 21 IP AFU 71 73 OTUCenIral F:y:ng School RAF College

FAA 758 759 766 767 798 7Q9 Squadrons

Percival Proctor (RN)SenalsMk IA P5999 6037 6050 6079 61ul 6113 61316145 6166 6167 (99 alc,Mk IIA X8825 8859.8898 8912 (50 a/c) BV535 573586 612. 625 658 (100 alc, Total 100 alcMaIn UnItsFAA 752 754 755. 756 758 Squadrons

Percival Proctor (RAF)SenalsMk II Z7193 7222.7237 7252 '46 alc), BT278 281 (4aic) TOial 50 alcMy III R7530 7539 7559 7573 (25 a C) DXI81 201215 243 (50 alc), HM279 324 337 373 390 433. 451

485 (162 a/c) LZ556 603. 621 663 672 717 730771 784 804 (200 a/c; To al 437 alc

KIV MX450 455 (6 a C) NPI56 198 210 254 267309 323 369 382 403 (200 a C) RMI60 197 219

230 '50 d C) Totdl 256 a cMaIn nt s124RSI24SS

Percival Prentice T.lSenalsVRI89 212 24 a c VR218 253 257 296 301 324(100 a c VSW 290 316 338 352 397 409 414(125 a c \,S609 654 681 698 723 758 100 a c

TOlal 349 a cMain un:lsI A I 2 3 6 7 22 frS 5 6 7 9 II 16 22 ~3 25RFS Central F:v:ng School RAF Co,.ege

Percival Sea Prince T.!Senals

'FII" 134 17 a c T934 949 2 a c .~ :'3~ 7428 a c WP30: 320 14 a c TOIa, 41 a cMat~. "nitsFAA 72:' :50 Squad~ons

Scottish Aviation/British Aerospace jetsueamSena!sXX475 5L. 26 T I of which XX475 47b 478 481 483

490 mod:fted 10 T 2 ZAIIO III 2 T2 ZE438 441.; T 3 Total 32 a c

MaIn UnItsRAF 3 6 FTSFAA 75r Squadron

Scottish Aviation Bulldog T.!SenalsXX513 562.611 640 653 672 685 714 (130 a/c)MaIn 'unlts2 FTS UnIversity Air Squadrons Cenlral FlyIng SchoolRN EFTS

Shorts TucanoSenalsZFI35 145 et seq Total 130 a cMaIn UnIts7 frS first

Vickers Valetta T.3Sena!sWG256 267 12 a c, Wj461 487 (27 a c To al 39 a cMaIn UnItsI 2 6 A, S 228 OCU RAF College

Vickers Varsity T.!Senals

F324 335. 369 394 408 42 (60 a c ')886 921937 950 50 a c, 'L621 642 665 692 (50 a cXD366 (I a c Toal161 a cMaIn UnItsI AES 1 2 ANS 5 6 II frS 201 AFS Central FlyIngSchool Central Navlgatlon and Con rol School RAFCollege

Westland WapitiSenalsK2236 2247 (12 a/c)MaIn UnIts501 502 503. 504 601 602 605. 607 608 Squadrons

Westland-Bell Sioux HT.2SenalsXV31 324 15 a~}

MaIn UnItsRAF Cenlral FlyIng SchoolAAC Advanced Rotary WIng Fit ht

Westland/Aerospatiale Gazelle HT.2/HT.3Sena!sXW845 852 864 866 868 870 871 884 886 887890 891 894 895 898 902 906 907 91Q 21 HT 2 10HT 3) XX373 382 3 I 36 397 4C6 410 415 431136 441 446 451 9 HT 4 4 HT 3 XZ930 94~ 2 HT 2II HT 3) ZA801 804 4 HT3 To al 61 a cMaIn unitsRAF Central FlyIng SchoolAAC Advance Rotary Wing FltghlFAA 705 Squadron

AACAASAb initioADCADDAESAlF

AFSAGSAIA SAO SAOPAOSAPAPIASFASPASRASSASTA/T/AATCA/T/PATS

BABSBA SBBMFBCATPBEB/F

BFTSB&GSbhpBSF

CA SCDTcnCFSClutchCOCU

Army Air CorpsAir Armament SchoolFrom the beginningAircraft Disposal CompanyAirstream Direction DetectorAir Electronics SchoolAfter flight servicing (when aircraft not toto fly again for a period)Advanced Flying SchoolAir Gunnery SchoolAir In erception (airborne radar)Air avigation SchoolAir Observer and avigator SchoolAir Observation PostAir Observers SchoolAir Publica ionAtitude Position IndicatorAircraft Servicing FlightAircraft Servicing PanAir Saff RequirementAir Signallers SchoolAir Saff TargetAircraft Technician AirframeAir Training CorpsAircraft Technician PropulsionArmament Training School

Blind Approach Beacon SystemBasic Air Navigation SchoolBattle of Britain Memorial FlightBritish Commonwealth Air Training PlanBleriot ExperimentalBefore flight servicing (carried out onaircraf due to fly)Basic Flying Training SchoolBombing and Gunnery SchoolBrake horse powerBritish Standard Fine (screw thread type)

Civil Air Navigation SchoolCoast Defence TrainingChief Flying Instruc orCentral Flying SchoolGroup of RAF sta ionsCommanding OfficerConversion Unit

DCFIDesynIndicatorDMEDNAWD&P

EFTSE&RFTS

Eureka

E&WS

FAAFISFLAPSFRSFTS

GCAGeeGeorgeGPIGTS

HFHMSHPhpHQH2S

IAi/cICOIFIFTUILSIntercomIREIRTISAISO

Deputy Chief Flying InstructorRemote indicator driven electrically frommaster transmitterDistance Measuring EquipmentDirectorate of Naval Air WarfareDevelopment and Production

Elementary Flying Training SchoolElementary and Reserve Flying TrainingSchoolGround transmitter used in conjunctionwith Rebecca for guidin aircraft 0

argeElec rical and Wireless School

Fleet Air ArmFlying Instruc ors SchoolFront-line Armamen Practice SchoolFlying Refresher SchoolFlying Training School

Ground Controlled ApproachNaviga ion and target identification radarAutomatic pilotGround Position IndicatorGlider Training School

High FrequencyHis/Her Majesty's ShipHandling PartyHorse powerHeadquar ersTarget finding radar

Incidental AllowanceIn chargeIdle cut-off swi chIns rumen FlyingIntensive Flying Trials UniIns rumen Landing Sys emIntercommunica ionsInstrumen Rating ExaminerInstrumen Rating TestInternational Standard AtmosphereInternational Standards Organisa ion

"·"t-~1

TACA Tac ical Aircraf aviga ion systemTA ~ Tac ical Air avigation SystemTAS True Air SpeedTDS Training Depot Sa ionTP Test PilotTrolley-acc Trolley-accumulatorTWU Tactical Weapons UnitTx Transmitter

JPJPT

Kite

LOHLOXLP

MDAPMDCMeMETSMEXOMFmic/telMRSMTMU

avexNCO

M

(0) AFUOCOCUORORPOTU

PA(P) AFUPIEPFCUPIOpSIPSP

QF!QGH

RAeCRAFRASRCAFRCD!

Jet ProvostJet Pipe Temperature

Aircraft

Light Observation Helicop erLiquid OxygenLow Pressure

Mutual Defence Assistance ProgrammeMiniature Detonating CordMeteorologyMulti-engine Training SquadronMulti-engine Cross-overMedium FrequencyMicrophone/telephoneMarine Reconnaissance SchoolMotor TransportMaintenance Unit

Navigation exerciseon-commissioned Officerautical ile

(Observer) Advanced Flyin UnitOfficer CommandingOpera ional Conversion UnitOperational RequiremenOpera ional Readiness PanOperational Training Unit

Personal Assis ant(Pilo) Advanced Flying UnitPetrol electricPowered Flying Control UnitPilot Induced OscillationPer square inch (pounds pressure)Perforated Steel Plate

Qualified Flying InstructorRadar-controlled descent

Royal Aero ClubRoyal Air Force/Royal Aircraft Fac oryReserve Aeroplane SquadronRoyal Canadian Air ForceRate of Climb and Descen Indicator

Rebecca

RFCR&!RR ASR RRPMRSRSFR/TRx

SANSASSASOSBASFTSSGRshpSISLAPSSMACSMFS COSSS of TT

UASUNFUSAAF

VHFVIPVOR

WIT

Aircraf navigation device used inconjunction wi h EurekaRoyal Flying CorpsRepair and InspectionRoyal avyRoya Naval Air ServiceRoyal aval ReserveRevolu ions per minu eReserve Squadron/Radio SchoolRadio Servicing FlightRadio TelephonyReceiver

School of Air avigationStability Augmentation SystemSenior Air Staff OfficerStandard Beam ApproachService Flying Training SchoolSchool of General ReconnaissanceShaft Horse PowerStudent InstructorSecond-line Armament Practice SchoolShort Maintenance Air CourseSa ion Main enance FlightSenior on-commissioned OfficerSignals SchoolSchool of Technical Training

University Air SquadronUnified Fine (screw thread type)United States Air Force

-Very High FrequencyVery Important PersonVariable Omni Range

Wireless Telegraphy

Index

Advanced Flymg Schools 43, 172, 173, 182, 191Advanced Flymg Trammg Schools 44, 45, 92Advanced and OperatIonal Flymg Trammg HelIcopter Squadron

53Aenal Bombmg and Gunnery, School of, 30Aerial Co-operation with Coastal Arllllery, School of, 26Aerial Fighting, Schools of, 24Aerial Gunnery, Schools of, 22Aenal Gunnery and Bombmg, School of, 30Aenal aVlgation and Bomb-droppmg, Schools of, 26Aerial aVlgatlon School 29AeronautIcs, Schools of, 26Air Anll-Submanne School 52Air Armament Schools 31 33Aircrewman Trammg Squadron 54Air Electromcs and Air Engmeers School 47Air Elec romcs School 45Air Expenence FlIghts 164, 167, 168Air Gunners Schools 50Air Gunnery Schools 37 44, 86Air aVlgatIon Schools 32, 36, 37, 44, 47 82, 182, 185Air Observer and aVlga or Schools 35, 84Air Obervers Schools 32. 33, 35, 37 38, 40, 81Air PIlotage Flight/School 27, 30, 31. 32Air Schools 115Air Signallers Schools 44, 45Air TraffIc Control School 44Air Trammg Squadron 47Air Weapons Trammg Squadron 52All-Weather Flgh er OperatIonal Flymg School 52All Weather Fighter Pool 51All Weather Fighter School 52Andover Conversion Unit 46Anson, Avro 32, 33, 37, 42, 44, 45, 62, 77-88, 92, 116, 183Anti-Submanng Inshore Patrol Observers, School for 26AOP School 44Argosy Conversion Umt 45Armament and G nnery School 30, 31Armament Trammg Camps 31. 32, 33Armament Trammg Stations 33Army Co-operation, School of, 27, 29, 30Ar Illery and lnfan ry Co-opera Ion School 24ArtIllery Observation School 24Alas, Armstrong Whl worth 38, 72At acker, Vickers-Supermanne 51Audax Hawker 32, 69, 71. 76. 94Auster AOP aircraft 45, 46, 109. 37Avenger, Gr mman 51Avro Type E 13Avro 504 7, 15, 16. 22, 25, 30, 31. 32, 56-60Avro 621 62Avro 652 78

Baboon, BAT 24BAe146 Bntlsh Aerospace 47

BallIol, Boulton Pa 144, 145-152, 172, 182Balloon School 9Bannerman, Major Sir Alexander JOBarracuda, Fairey 50BaSIC Air NaVigatIOn Schools 44, 45BaSIC Flymg Trainmg Schools 44, 45, 163Battle, Fairey 33, 37Be m Approach Trammg Umts 38, 42, 83, 84, 92Beaufighter, Bristol 40Beaver, de Havilland Canada 46BE Biplanes, Royal Aircraft Factory 13, 17, 18, 21. 22Belfast, Short 47Belvedere Conversion Um 46Beverley, Blackburn 45Bison Avro 30Blac burn B2 32, J09Blackburn B52 147Blackburn, Blackburn 30Blenheim, Bnstol 86, 14, 116Bleno 10noplane JO, 15, 17Bleno Parasol 18BlInd Approach Trammg Um s 37Boemg B-29 45Bomber Command Bombmg School 45, 182Bombmg and Gunnery Schools 35, 37Borel onoplane 15Boulton Paul P J08 145BoxkIte, Bnstol 13Boys Trammg Depot 27Boys Wmg, Cranwell 30Bngand, Bnstol 44Bris 01 Fighter 22, 30Bnstol Monoplane 13, 15Bristol Scout 18, 22Bntanma, Bnstol 47, 182Bntanma FlIght J06Broadhurst, Harry 192Buccaneer, H wker Siddeley 47, 53, 144, 202, 209, 2JOBulldog, Bnstol 31, 72Bulldog, Scot ish AVla ion 46, 164

Cade, Avro 62, 164Camm, SIr Sy ney 69, 76Canberra, EnglIsh Electnc 45, 213Ca dron Biplane 13Ca dron G3 18 22Cen ral Flymg School 7, 12, 13, 16, 17,21, 26. 28, 30, 31. 32, 37

38, 40, 44, 45. 46, 48, 58, 72, 73, 92, J08, 116, 129, 140, 141,142, 144, 146, 149, 167, 172, 198, 199,203,219,220,229,230,232, 244

Cen ral Gunnery School 35, 44, 45Central aVlga Ion and Control School 44, 82, 140Central aVigallon School 44Chmook, Boemg Ver 01 47Chipmunk, de Havilland 7, 42, 44. 45, 46, 47, 63, 149, 150, 151,

161-170