First of the RAF's 'New' 146's Delivered

[Garry Russell]

Hi Chris

Some of the flights past here are US Department of Transportation and some are US Air Force Military Airlift Command

Would that be a pax/freight differential??

[Chris Trott]

Could be either, but typically the DOT flights are the R&R (pax) flights. If it's an active movement of a unit to or from an operation area (even for an exercise, so like deploying a Fighter Wing to Lakenheath for a joint US/UK operation) then it's usually tasked by TACC (Tanker/Airlift Control Center) and flown with the REACH callsign and will be both pax and freight. Most freight moves under TACC direction.

[Garry Russell]

Cheers Chris

[Chris558]

These 146's are most probably stop gaps until the A400M arrives. Interesting to see it in the current 'uniform' though.

The two for Qinetiq are an RJ70 and 85 and are replacing the Andover aswell as the 1-11.

[Garry Russell]

Ah...so the 146's will be around for quite some time then

Cheers Chris

Yes..it is nice to see it in the grey and very smart it looks too.

Also an increased chance to continue to see a type that is fading away a bit with several large fleet trimming the type recently.

Brussels Airlines Lufthansa Cityline and Cityjet have disposed of a few recently

I now see about one or two 146 movements a year when Titan comes to the rescue.

[Chris558]

Yes Garry, it only seems like yesterday when I first saw a 146: the QF evaluation examples over my house in 1983. I remember how interesting and 'cool' I thought they looked, compared with most airliners.

But most of the original 146's are now 25-30 years old, so, it's just about done its time.

I guess most of the later RJ's or Avroliners are still in service?

[Garry Russell]

Quite a few of the early ones have been scrapped now but most are still in existence but increasingly a lot are being stored

Yes...it seems a recent type and then you think

The first one I saw was Dan Air crew training in March 1984.

Although it did do well it is a pity it was never quite the 'Viscount replacement' it was supposed to be.

I flew on Air UKs's G-CNMF when it was brand new, now that's far away from our shores still flying as a geriatric jet.

Time is funny...I was only thinking recently that it is 24 years since BMA retired the Viscount, a type they seemed to operate for ever but in fact it was 22 years in service with them, so two years longer out of service than it was in.

The Boeing 747-400's now being scrapped seemed new to me until I remember that was 20+ years ago I first saw many of them.

[TSR2]

Many of the original 146's are serviceable too. As I understand it, other than the avionics, most of the 146's had many of the other updates that were "baked into" the later RJ's. Its a very solid airframe and was originally designed to be able to handle semi rough strips. There where some issues as I recall during its earlier years (seizing ailerons?), but its a mature offering and does what it does very well. I love it Last of the DH stable.

[Garry Russell]

I think all the issues were solved including the fumes into the cabin

The only problem now with the type is that things are moving on as it is thirty years

I've not heard any reports of decrepit 146's and some that have been parted out were because they were good machines and as such gave a good supply of spare like when G-APEM the best Merchantman of the three left was the one scrapped to get good spares for 'EP & 'ES

As the scrapping of Airbus A.318's barely two years old shows, scrapping can have little or nothing to do with the particular frame being unserviceable in any way.

The way the 146 is built means it will go on forever but maintenance costs of four engines and complex flaps mean if the short field is not needed then it's time to go. The jet is also a bit slow compared to others which makes no odds if it is used for short stages in difficult conditions...but a lot of the time they are used in a standard way and that puts them up unfairly against other types.

The One-Eleven suffered the same being criticised for not being able to take a full load to th Med as economically as 737 and DC 9 but it wasn't designed to do that. It was designed as "The Bust Stop Jet" a frequent short cycle operation that would have made it stand above the rest..

The 146/RJ is as good as it ever was and will go on for many years but I don't think it will last in great number in Europe for many more.

I still think it was a mistake to drop the RJX, but that seems to have been done for all the wrong reasons as is so often the case.

The 146 with the RJ then the RJX meant that at last a British airliner was moving with the market rather than desperately trying to catch up long after everyone else moved, and it was thrown away.

[RobDob]

As Garry alluded to, the CRAF (Civil Reserve Air Fleet) here in the US has taken on greater and greater roles since Desert Storm because of the limited airlift capability versus demand. It makes much more sense to have the C-5's and C-17's fly the equipment while a couple of 747's or similar fly the troops into their forward base than use additional transports to carry them in general packed discomfort on web seats or pallet-mounted airline seats.

BTW, one of the odd things is that the entire CRAF fleet (which is coordinated by the US Department of Transportation under the FAA, not directly by the US Military) is detailed online for public view - http://www.dot.gov/ost/oiser/craf.htm . A spotter's dream I'm sure though.

Thanks for that info Chris; very useful. Explains why they can't accept TACAN approaches while the ILS is being upgraded at OTBH!!!!