What's amazing about all Tornado variants is there diversity within and between roles. For example, the GR1 was a Cold War Interdiction platform designed to fly low and fast in the vallies, hills and mountains of Europe to deploy its respective payload (including nuclear weapons prior to Trident assuming the UK deterrent role) and to then extricate from the area very quickly. Now, the first Persian Gulf oil war (Op Granby) highlighted the dangers of low level flying in more challenging theaters so the aircraft took on new roles and was reequiped with updated avionincs and systems to undertake new roles and redesignated (GR4 for example) performing well in various roles it may not have been ultimately designed for despite the MRCA designation. With the F3, it was primarily a flying weapons platform designed to defend airspace and to engage targets from some distance away but also in later years performed more of a intercept role despite the fact that it lacked the agility of a fighter. The RAF says goodbye to the Tornado now as the Typhoon and F35 mark a new era for the Royal Air Force. The Service and the country certainly got it's money's worth for the 30 plus years in which they flew. Whilst I only painted them, I am sure they are leaving the Service at the top of their game. I spent 20 years of my life clambering over these machines and, for me, their retirement feels like a berivment and I'm sure many other former service members who earned a living working on them, flying them may well feel the same way. Thank you, Tornado, you will be missed.
@willb8684
6 жыл бұрын
best tornado interview yet...awesome job
@Aircrewinterview
6 жыл бұрын
Thanks Will!
@ashleystyles6888
6 жыл бұрын
The bulk of my career related to this platform. I was a supplier. nice to see all those components and LRUs once again.
@gazza2933
3 жыл бұрын
Ashley Respect to you guys.
@garryharriman7349
5 жыл бұрын
What a wonderful place to visit. I am from Scunthorpe and have relatives that live in Rauceby so know the area well. I live in South Carolina, USA now following a 20 year RAF career ( first as a resident of Goose Bay and later relocating to the US and never would have imagined that) and miss the UK a lot and have not really fell into another career or stable and meaningful job since my departure from the RAF in 2006. I know the Tornado variants like the back of my hand as painter and finisher NCO and feel sad to see the Tornado (GR4) finally retired from service as the Typhoon and problematic F35 spearhead the front line. If I ever come back to UK for a visit, I will be sure to visit. Maybe I could open a virtual reality aircraft refurbishment simmulator😁. Thanks for a great upload. I flew in an F3 during my time at Mount Pleasant and will always be greatly appreciative of that privileged experience. Thanks again and have a beer or 3 in the equally wonderful (and refurbished) Bustard Inn! Cheers. Garry Harriman, South Carolina.
@nerodcs3087
6 жыл бұрын
a dream comming true, finaly seeing the displays up close and in action. awesome video (again)
@Aircrewinterview
6 жыл бұрын
Cheers Nero.
@keiko909
4 жыл бұрын
Amazing video! The F3 was the dream plane I wanted to fly in the RAF when I was going through air cadets
@tacoenvy
4 жыл бұрын
Absolutely brilliant interview and great tour, Dave is a real Gent!
@grahamthebaronhesketh.
Жыл бұрын
I fly the GR4 in VR...Heavy old girl but I love it.
@johannmost3709
5 жыл бұрын
„It never told you they were hostile, just not friendly“.... that‘s a very british IFF system😂
@rhysgoodman7628
2 жыл бұрын
Hahaha!
@clewis5220
9 ай бұрын
Great job. Love to know what happened to the GR1 full mission Redifon simulators I was a techie instructor on at Honington. No visual simulation but still fun to fly and just press ‘reset’ if I crashed it!
@IrishManJT
6 жыл бұрын
Thanks for posting this. Very interesting.
@SimRacingPakistan
5 жыл бұрын
AMAZING VIDEO !!! thank you for sharing this !
@robw3027
5 жыл бұрын
Great video. Lucky guy to have flown both the RAF Phantom and the Tornado F2/F3.
@thefrecklepuny
6 жыл бұрын
Would love to sit in that Tornado F-3 front cockpit and say ''speak to me Goose, speak to me''. I wonder If I'd be told to leave and never invited back? ;-) Seriously, a very well delivered presentation. Learned quite a bit about a pretty underated machine.
@Aircrewinterview
6 жыл бұрын
I can imagine a lot of people would like to do that!
@davidmuir6849
9 ай бұрын
Nice setup I’m doing a real buccaneer with interfacing the real controls it’s easy to do . Regards Dave from Scotland
@carsonhaught9934
6 жыл бұрын
Another excellent interview with the redoubtable Dave. Many thanks.
@Aircrewinterview
6 жыл бұрын
Cheers
@gazza2933
4 жыл бұрын
Great work on this one guys! Great video too!
@EliteHobbies
6 жыл бұрын
Excellent video, thank you.
@Aircrewinterview
6 жыл бұрын
Thanks Philip.
@andyh1965
6 жыл бұрын
Interesting video, thanks for posting.
@Aircrewinterview
6 жыл бұрын
+andyh1965 Thanks Andy.
@simonrichardson5077
6 жыл бұрын
Excellent,thanks
@Aircrewinterview
6 жыл бұрын
Thanks Simon.
@williamambrose3947
6 жыл бұрын
loved it thanks
@TechGamer45
6 жыл бұрын
Fantastic.
@AvengerII
6 жыл бұрын
You can still tell the designers really weren't embracing the whole ergonomics idea. They definitely weren't thinking the Tornado was going to be used in an interceptor role or anything that would have involved dogfighting. The forward view is constrained by both the layout of the HUD and its framework as well as the frame that holds the flat pane of the forward part of the canopy. Try playing any simulator or combat game that has an accurate reproduction of this cockpit (other others with similar canopy layouts like the F-4 and F-14) and you'll see what I mean. The advantage of a flat plane of glass forward? Optical distortion is close to zero and you can actually manufacture that glass (or plastic?) to be stronger than a curved piece -- in other words, greater strength against bird strikes with the canopy. The F-14 is similar in this way, too, although it was intended from the beginning to be a dogfighter contrary to revisionist/anti-fanboy views. Oddly enough, they (Grumman) DID plan for an upgrade to the F-14 (had it stayed in production and gotten funding for a QuickStrike model) to replace the entire front screen with a wrap-a-around canopy similar to what the F-15, F-16, and F-18. I'm guessing some of the equipment for the forward canopy in the Tomcat was a holdover from the F-4 (which was designed with a complete interceptor mentality and just barely mediocre dogfighting ability) just as aspects of the landing gear and intake ducts were adapted from the A-6 Intruder to save money. I've always felt the cockpit view forward was one of the weakest points of the F-14 (ANY model; the D-model sure didn't have the most advanced cockpit layout when it debuted! It's hardly different from the A- or B-models!!) aside from the P&W TF30 engines in the A-models. They definitely got the cockpit layout and view right in the F-18 (A-model) first! Everything that's followed has pretty much emulated or evolved from that design including the E-model of the F-15 which is leaps beyond and way better than the cockpit of the F-15 A-D models. They have put in new equipment in the F-15 cockpits since they've done upgrades (AESA radar retrofits) but most of the improvements (minor changes to the stick and throttle; equipment adapted from the in-production F-15E derivatives) are invisible to the average eye. It's more like the Luftwaffe upgrades of their F-4s where they replaced the old APQ radar sets with APG-65s. The only major piece of new equipment they installed in their F-4 cockpits were the HUD's (which the original Phantoms did NOT have. The first military jets with HUDs were Buccaneers. Earliest fighter I'm aware of with a HUD was the F-14). I believe the APG-65 was adapted to interface and work with the old existing radar equipment of the Luftwaffe F-4Fs; they did NOT replace the old radar displays and steam gauges with F-18 cockpit equipment.
@andyreynolds6194
4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for this- interesting!
@Then.72
4 жыл бұрын
The jet was the fastest fighter bomber with the most outstanding performance in the gulf war ..... no need to look state what you think where faults
@AvengerII
4 жыл бұрын
@@Then.72 I've got news for you... F-111s were more effective than any of the post-1970s fighter-bombers in taking out tanks during the first Gulf War. The problems the Tornado AND F-16 had was that their targeting systems were biased towards low-level attack. They didn't operate as well above 20,000ft. Those planes were designed to fight World War III at low levels evading radar networks, NOT a war in the desert where a wily dictator ordered his AAA batteries to lay down lead carpet in the sky. The Tornado and F-16 were forced to operate at altitude to avoid the AAA. They lost at least 4-6 planes of each type prior to shifting to higher altitude. The UK press was apopleptic that they lost planes (even though pre-war estimates were the Allies would lost at least 100-120 planes; they lost less than 40 planes and some of those were training mission crashes prior to the war). The problem was that the accuracy in bombing dropped tremendously and they were hitting less than half the targets with their bombs at altitude. F-111 accuracy (with its old PAVE tack pods) was much better -- they were responsible for more tanks (10 times the F-16 count) and actually destroyed more tanks than the A-10 which has an overblown reputation. The A-10 performs at its best when you don't have to worry about a modern anti-aircraft, radar network guiding SAMs and AAA. A few A-10s were lost when they tried to engage in areas with decent radar coverage and AAA. The A-10 has done well in Afghanistan because they're fighting enemies armed with sticks and stones, not the latest defense networks. They eventually did correct the targeting system issues and installed systems that were better above 20,000ft but that was after the first Gulf War ended in spring 1991.
@Then.72
4 жыл бұрын
AvengerII where are you from ?
@AvengerII
4 жыл бұрын
@@Then.72 USA, Midwest.
@andresilvasophisma
Ай бұрын
Thank you for this. Is the simulator based in a current computer game?
@Aircrewinterview
Ай бұрын
I’m not sure what sim they use, but you can find them in FB to book a flight.
@Aolen75
6 жыл бұрын
Awesome
@Jonay1990
4 жыл бұрын
its funny, the Jaguar guys seem to think that they were the first to have HUD as primary instrument and the steam gauges were standby....
@FlightSimMuseum
4 жыл бұрын
Excellent cockpit tour!!! Running Prepar3D at the end?
@davidhaystacks4153
4 жыл бұрын
Yup that's P3D (academic)
@theflyingfool
6 жыл бұрын
Camera handling could have been better but great info!
@aigen56
5 жыл бұрын
Was there any significant differences between the Tornado F2 to the Tornado F3?
@flyorflying1087
3 жыл бұрын
my father is commander of boeing 747 and he is a pilot of helicopter, and my sister is commander of airbus a330 and she's a agricultural pilot!!
@jakobole
5 жыл бұрын
Could it be flown from the backseat?
@garryharriman7349
5 жыл бұрын
No
@jakobole
5 жыл бұрын
@@garryharriman7349 Thanks
@garryharriman7349
5 жыл бұрын
@@jakobole I just painted them mate so I am not an expert. I believe that 'twin stcks' on all varients did exist acting as trainers, but the back seat crew had limited control of the aircraft. I think rudder pedals existed in the back seat, but I can not actually recall. Also, the back seat crew were not really navigators per say but could be more accurately described as weapons systems operators.
@jakobole
5 жыл бұрын
@@garryharriman7349 Thanks - I knew about the weapons, but still curious as to whether it was flyable from the back. Thanks again.
@garryharriman7349
5 жыл бұрын
@@jakobole No probs mate. As I say, I only painted them!
@gcdhvf4896
Жыл бұрын
And yet it was phased out soon after... Because the engines were inadequate at higher altitude. Typical of poor British administration/governance!
Пікірлер: 59