I'm doing the notes for a back story I've been considering for a few years. Not saying anything more about it until it's written.

Anyway, I have a few questions.

1. Could VC10s (of any transport version in RAF service) fly nonstop from Bahrain to Australia or would they require refuelling?

2. Probably one for Aeroplane Driver or maybe Dave. I know military aircraft seem to have a smell that's quite distinct, do civilian airliner have a similar smell?  Would a man who's been ex-RAF aircrew then civilian pilot recognise a difference?

I did have anther be about Companies House, but I solved that one.

The VC10's max range was just about 6000 miles, so they could have made Perth, but not further east. And that would have been with no reserves at all.

Most likely they'd have refuelled at Gan.

Quote from: The Wooksta! on December 01, 2022, 06:25:43 AM2. Probably one for Aeroplane Driver or maybe Dave. I know military aircraft seem to have a smell that's quite distinct, do civilian airliner have a similar smell?  Would a man who's been ex-RAF aircrew then civilian pilot recognise a difference?

Assuming both types using either Jet A-1/JP-8 or Jet B/JP-4, then the fuel smell would be similar, as, I would assume, the hydraulics stench (yes, stench!). And that would be the main odours as long as you're not IN the actual airframe, methinks. Did that help any?

Could you smell an engine? Some engines seem to make more smoke than some other engines, for example.

They can both smell like body order and barf at times.

Quote from: PR19_Kit on December 01, 2022, 06:55:47 AMThe VC10's max range was just about 6000 miles, so they could have made Perth, but not further east. And that would have been with no reserves at all.

Most likely they'd have refuelled at Gan.

I think that Kit's second law (also known as Rheged's hypothesis) applies.   A well constructed backstory............    Perhaps you can envisage the VC10 ER?     Designed originally  to accommodate  longer range BOAC  flights.

The VC10s in question would be RAF and starting from either Scampton or Conningsby wth a full load of passengers.

I had a backup plan short chapter for IFR by Victors off the Australian coast.

Quote from: The Wooksta! on December 01, 2022, 06:25:43 AM2. Probably one for Aeroplane Driver or maybe Dave. I know military aircraft seem to have a smell that's quite distinct, do civilian airliner have a similar smell?  Would a man who's been ex-RAF aircrew then civilian pilot recognise a difference?

I did have anther be about Companies House, but I solved that one.

IN my experience the older they get, the more of an "airplane" smell they get.  I will say that new aircraft have the same kind of 'new' smell as a new car. 

I've never been in an active service military passenger aircraft, but walking through old ones in museums and active tanker/transports at airshows I can tell a more noticeable smell of oil and hydraulic fluid in a military aircraft.  I'm guessing because airliners tend to have a lot more interior fixtures insulating the cabin from the smells than a tanker.  Personally I'd take the oil/hydraulic smell any day over some of the smells you get on airliners. 

Ta. That's just what I needed.

It occurs to me that a VC10K3 could probably go a LOT further than the stated 6000 nms or so as they have the entire cabin full of socking great fuel tanks, but that would be their only payload, not much use for scenario Lee.

Quote from: PR19_Kit on December 01, 2022, 09:48:17 AMIt occurs to me that a VC10K3 could probably go a LOT further than the stated 6000 nms or so as they have the entire cabin full of socking great fuel tanks, but that would be their only payload, not much use for scenario Lee.

VC10 had a fuel capacity of nearly 18,000 imperial gallons , and the refuelling tanks are reported as having added a further 3,500 imperial gallons...............probably good for a total of  about 7,200miles with very minimal reserves

One consideration separate from fuel range for a long distance flight might be oil consumption.  I have NO idea what the numbers are like for a RR Conway, but as an engine with a design going back to the 40s I'm guessing it was a far cry from modern consumption rates.  Modern engines typically count on anything from .25-1qt/hour consumption rate, so for a flight pushing 14 hours an older generation engine might be having some problems.  Again no idea no Conway numbers but as an example the A320 with either IAE or CFM engines has a 13qt minimum dispatch number.  But those are very modern engines compared to the first turbofan.

I seem to remember that original planning for the Falklands Black Buck missions involved the use of Buccaneers instead of Vulcans but that oil consumption on the Spey would not allow for a flight that long. 

Just something to consider...maybe bigger oil tanks on any What If VC10-ER..?

Oil consumption was a factor during the Falklands Black Buck raids, and the Victor tankers on that mission had Conways too. The full length of the flights were 6600 miles, but the tankers didn't go the whole way so that was a similar sort of range as the one Lee's proposing. 

Don't you just love the education offered in these discussions? 

According to my old Flight Sargent, long haul flights don't fly in straight lines, they use great arcs and thermals to preserve fuel although on a chart it does look like a straight line but it's the curvature of the Earth.
Take off is into the wind and landing is also into the wind,  but if not the plane will plummet like a giant breeze block.
As to the smell I always thought it was urine, where the squaddies had missed the bucket on a
 C-130 as there's no toilets for the passengers just the crew.
I never made it to Sargent during my time with the Royal Auxiliary Air Force, trade Assistant Airtraffic Controller 1986-1997.