Inside a K4

[AJW]

I've wondered for a while what's inside the back of the K4 if they were never fitted with fuel tanks? Why were they never fitted with a full compliment of pax seats?

[Rover75]

I would have thought GENUINE health & safety, sit behind tanks of aviation fuel....

[petet16]

I would have thought GENUINE health & safety, sit behind tanks of aviation fuel....

The K4 had no tanks in the cabin , only the the K2 and 3 had the fuselage tanks separated from the crew area in the fwd cabin by the environmental bulkhead.

As to why the K4 was never fitted with seats I don't really know, the rear was stripped of all it's trim and insulation behind the env bulkhead presumably to save weight, and I think it was only really viewed for it's AAR capability rather than passenger carrying.

[Tonkenna]

Hi Andy,

The K4s were all ex-BA jets and did not have the cargo doors that the K3s had through which the fuel tanks were fitted. The K2s did not have cargo doors either so they cut large holes through which the tanks were inserted, however, for reasons various (rumours such as cost, time and complications) this was not done for the K4s.

The K4s had some 30 or so seats (rear facing) in the front quarter of the cabin and the rest was bare floor. the cabin had normal wall insulation through out the length and no environmental bulkhead like the K3s. It was thus empty beyond the seats.

Tonks

[AJW]

Thanks for clarifying that Andy. I found an article on the sight about why they didn't put tanks in the back, it just puzzled me as to why more pax seats weren't put in the back. I can only assume it's because more tankers were required rather than multi role tanker/transports?

I guess the K4's had a full size pax door on the left side rather than the smaller door on the right side like the K3?

Maybe one day I'll find out why some of the windows got blanked in the K series of aircraft too!!

[petet16]

The most likely reason for the window blanks is that metal blanks are much less maintenance intensive than perspex windows.

[Tonkenna]

Exactly right Pete...

The reason the cabin was not filled with seats is two fold. Firstly it was a tanker and not a pax ac and it save money not having to refurbish/strengthen the whole floor and secondly if you put too many seats in you increase the zero fuel weight and (especially if you fill it up with people) reduce the fuel you can carry which is a bad thing for a tanker; the whole idea was to carry your own personnel and perhaps a team from the receiver unit if you are trailing them... and that was it,

Tonks

[scott736]

A further reason to the lack of more passenger seats is the lack of hold space for the luggage, being a 101 sqn 'K', it had the HDU (Hose Drum Unit) fitted in the area which used to be the rear hold area, hence they only had space for around 30 peoples bags.
These were great 'Party Jets' when on a trail!!

[Craig]

A further reason to the lack of more passenger seats is the lack of hold space for the luggage, being a 101 sqn 'K', it had the HDU (Hose Drum Unit) fitted in the area which used to be the rear hold area, hence they only had space for around 30 peoples bags.
These were great 'Party Jets' when on a trail!!

Fair point, that'd be a hell of a dancefloor! VC-10 with a disco ball?

[AJW]

Thanks again for the info. Sounds like the k4's would have been a whole load more useable (don't get me wrong, I know they were a very valuable asset!) if they had a cargo door!

[Stewart]

Thanks again for the info. Sounds like the k4's would have been a whole load more useable (don't get me wrong, I know they were a very valuable asset!) if they had a cargo door!

Unfortunately BOAC did not think the same when they put their order in!