Classic British Flight Sim

I can't remember where, but I do remember reading something about the fleet of Viscounts that BAF/BW had during the 80s and 90s. Apparently, most of the fleet had their cruising altitude limited to 15,000ft, whilst only a couple of aircraft could fly higher (for flights to Nice or wherever).

Does this mean that any air-frames surviving that are almost air-worthy (and were returned to use as charter planes for historical flights) would have a limited service life? What about the engines? This begs the question - How come Hs. 748 can still be flying in Canada with Dart engines and Viscounts cannot?

Sorry if this question has been asked ...

Michael. T

BAFs Viscount 802/806 and the 808C Freightmaster were limited to a ceiling of 17000ft. Of the three cabin compressors, the No4 was removed to save weight after the restriction was imposed to lengthen airframe life. The 836 G-BFZL eventually went down the same route. Not sure if the ex Baltic /Hot Air aircraft had it done.

There was nothing wrong with the engines, and many received a life extension program developed by BAe, but the maintenance costs, together with customer demand for more modern and economic equipment meant most were withdrawn before their airframe life was up. When the Parcelforce contract expired, so the fleet was withdrawn and sold in Africa.

cheers

Fraser

Viscount Cornbank wrote:BAFs Viscount 802/806 and the 808C Freightmaster were limited to a ceiling of 17000ft. Of the three cabin compressors, the No4 was removed to save weight after the restriction was imposed to lengthen airframe life. The 836 G-BFZL eventually went down the same route. Not sure if the ex Baltic /Hot Air aircraft had it done.

There was nothing wrong with the engines, and many received a life extension program developed by BAe, but the maintenance costs, together with customer demand for more modern and economic equipment meant most were withdrawn before their airframe life was up. When the Parcelforce contract expired, so the fleet was withdrawn and sold in Africa.

cheers

Fraser

Very sad story. I'm amazed that BAF or some other conservation group didn't acquire one/two or more aircraft and fly them every month just for enthusiasts.

As old is replaced with new, maybe one day, some guy is going to come across some old hangars literally filled with Viscount parts and engines... That would certainly be really good!

I'm amazed that BAF or some other conservation group didn't acquire one/two or more aircraft and fly them every month just for enthusiasts.

Nice idea 748 but the reality of doing so is far more complex than you'd first imagine. Ask anyone involved with XH558 what's required to keep her both on the ground and in the air and you'll see MONEY plays a big part.. as well as needing qualified folk to use it

ATB
DaveB

Severe corrosion was also a problem with the Viscount and it was a expensive problem, nothing that couldn't be repaired but it was costly.

By the mid 90's the Viscount were un economic to keep and keeping them so long was one of the downfalls of BAF.

They tried to stay British with the One-Elevens and ATP but the world had moved on and they couldn't compete with a mixed fleet of old aircraft

The final nail was the lack of spares support.

Some Viscounts, for example the Continental that went to Channel, were suffering from severe corrosion forcing their retirement at less than ten years old.

The Comet was made from a similar metal and some of those too, like the East African lasted less than ten years also.

Had it not been for BAF, the Viscount would have been in single figures in the UK during the latter part of the 1980's and become extinct with BMA in 1988.

G-APEX and G-AOYS were retired by BAF early on due to corrosion and almost from the beginning the fleet was slowly shrinking.

I'm surprised they kept them going that long, but there has been a lot of money spent keeping them going.

There was never a time where all the ex BA Viscounts were in service with BAF as before the last ones were in service there had been withdrawals. BAF used to say they had 19 Viscounts but the max in service was 17 and that wasn't for long although others were bought to help hold the numbers up but the different cockpit fit of the unique ex BEA machines just added to crewing costs when Viscounts joined from other sources and they varied too in many details. I believe work was done to try and make them more standard but I don't know on how many aircraft or to what extent it was done.

When G-AVJB was their only 810 is was used almost a separate division of one...it's own crews and own work doing charters rather than joining the others on schedules. At one time it seems to fly down to Gibraltar a fair bit. At one time they withdrew it as it didn't fit in, then sold it to Baltic but with Baltic it used to fly quite a lot with BAF again by by then it was SE-IVY.

I did at one time I did think we were going to see a large influx of Viscounts to the UK when Jadepoint, the then owners of BAF bought all the CAAC Viscounts and other in that part of the world but it was just as a broker and they were resold in the Far East.

History for the Viscount may well have been shorter

In the late sixties BEA was in negotiation with CAAC to sell them 13 Comets and 38 Viscounts, that is clearing the whole fleet of both types at that time. If that had gone ahead BAF as we knew it would never have happened.

The Viscount suffers from the same alloy problem that many British aircraft of that era suffer. The high magnesium content in the aluminum means that any corrosion will quickly spread if not immediately stopped. Unfortunately, the construction of the Viscount allowed corrosion to start easily and be very hard to catch and stop. When a major annual was done on N82D, a DeHavilland Heron, back in 2004, the mechanic brought in an attach angle that was part of the back of the wing box that created the flap well. It had a small section of corrosion on it and I asked why he removed an entire 4 inches of angle and some of the attached web instead of just putting corrosion inhibitor on it after cleaning it as the corrosion appeared to just be on the surface. He told me to wait a few days and I'd see. 3 days layer half the piece was covered in surface corrosion and at the origin it had developed into severe pitting. This was in spring, in Columbus, OH, so not near any salt water, and not really a "humid" part of the world that time of year either. I can only imagine what it was like on the Viscounts flying over the Channel, Southeast and East Coast of the US (Continental Airlines & Capital Airlines).

My thoughts believing aircraft such as Viscount being built better than British cars may be going out the window...

Does this mean most, if not all Viscounts would be unable to fly today because of corrosion? Maybe this is why the Viscount isn't as popular as Vickers had wanted.

I certainly hope 1-11's, Tridents and 748's didn't have the same problem...

The aircraft were built well but unfortunately the metal used was subject to corrosion

Depends a lot where they operated as Chris mentions

Britannia were the same but suffered less due to the high altitude long range rather than popping back and forth across the Channel

When Aden bought some Canadair Fours from BOAC the near coast base saw them corrode badly in a couple of years or so, ending their careers, so it was not just the British.

Some pilots have said it was frightening to look in the inspection hatch under the extreme rear fuse of Viscounts where the fin met the tailplane .

I doubt if any Viscount would ever be allowed to fly in Europe without being virtually new build

The airframe was good, well designed and well built but just made of the wrong stuff corrosion wise

Later types used better metals and Vickers also pretreated the metal before assembly which is why VC 10 and One-Elevens were a yellow green on the line long before other manufacturers did that. Not sure if the Vanguards were just painted as some line shots show a metal colour

Those types came off the line not with polished natural metal finishes but grey. The exception being the One-Eleven 400 prototype, demonstrator and American Airlines fleet which were special orders.

That's why the BOAC/BUA VC10 and BEA/TCA Vanguards had grey bottoms when the other fleet members had polished metal, same with the BUA One-Elevens

Most Doves and Herons were painted in a silver fox metallic paint over what was usually bare metal to combat corrosion. Apart from the early days it's rare to find a polished metal finish on those types and even the Queens Flight eventually over painted their Herons...in red

I believe work was done to try and make them more standard but I don't know on how many aircraft or to what extent it was done.

When G-AVJB was their only 810 is was used almost a separate division of one...it's own crews and own work doing charters rather than joining the others on schedules. At one time it seems to fly down to Gibraltar a fair bit. At one time they withdrew it as it didn't fit in, then sold it to Baltic but with Baltic it used to fly quite a lot with BAF again by by then it was SE-IVY.

Hi mate

They only had a separate flight for the 810s, all other crews were allowed to fly the 802/6s, the 807 and 808C. The 808 cockpit was fairly close to that of the 802/6, in that the overhead and side panels were almost the same, but the fire controls were moved from the pedestal to the coaming and it had no Smiths Flight System. The 807 on the other hand had the full Americanised cockpit, much like most 810s, but because the performance and weights were similar they were all crewed by a single flight. It was the performance aspect , rather than the cockpit layout, which kept the 810 crews separate.

cheers

Fraser

Cheers for that Fraser