A Little VC10derness

On thing puzzles me, we have seen a number of periscopes up for sale, but no sextants. Are they still fitted?

The sextants were removed years ago when the embedded IN/GPS FMS unit was fitted...

Tonks

I must check out the sextant I have in my loft. Don't think it is a VC10 one though.

I believe- and correct me if I'm wrong- the Mark 2 periscopic sextant was used. I have seen another Mark 2 on Ebay, originally used on a Vulcan. A rather more sophisticated piece of hardware than the inspection periscope!

Bill

Magnum wrote:I must check out the sextant I have in my loft. Don't think it is a VC10 one though.

The one I have is a Mk. IX BM bubble sextant that was from dad's time on Hastings.

Well today I had a look through the periscope on 150 and I have to admit you can see a lot more of the upper surface of the nacelles than I thought you would. You can see from the intake lips all the way back.

Although I still don't know what use one would put the view to if your instrumentation is telling you there is a problem, are you going to ignore your instruments because the upper nacelle view looks OK?

The view of the leading edge of the fin and tailplane is excellent.

Paul

One use was if you lost fire detection... which was possible. You could have a crew member monitor the engine visually. I have also used it to monitor a vibration that we thought was coming from that region and you could use it to check for ice or birdstike damage etc. For an interesting and scary view you could watch the tail while the ac was receiving fuel from another VC10... it didn't half bend a lot!

Tonks

Hi Tonks,

I would have thought there was such a surplus of power with the 10 that if you lost FD you could shut the engine down.

On a similar note we asked Boeing what was their philosophy if you dispatched under the MEL with one fire loop inop and the other failed in flight. They said you keep on trucking as the probability of having an engine fire on that same flight was so remote as not to be worth worrying about

Oh there is, but there are occasions when you don't really want to shut an engine down, so when needs must it was there! And to be honest I agree with the Boeing attitude! lol...

Not sure what the original reason for the fitting of them was...

Tonks

Tonkenna wrote:Oh there is, but there are occasions when you don't really want to shut an engine down, so when needs must it was there! And to be honest I agree with the Boeing attitude! lol...

Tonks

We had a couple of Capt's who thought otherwise and turned back. It was after the second occasion we asked Boeing.

Paul

LOL... well I guess it depends where you are... I once lost FD whilst off the coast of South Georgia, a good 800nm from MPA! You don't have many options in that part of the world LOL

Tonks

Tonkenna wrote:Oh there is, but there are occasions when you don't really want to shut an engine down, so when needs must it was there! And to be honest I agree with the Boeing attitude! lol...

Not sure what the original reason for the fitting of them was...

Tonks

My understanding from some of the first to be trained on the VC10 was that it was indeed to look at the engines (although the why do you want to part was missing). As they already had the sextant fitted and thus the housing for it then it made sence to have one that fitted there as well, and removed the need to re-invent the wheel, and the lower position to check the UC was just 'a good idea' which IMHO it is! From what I know it was not somthing that was often used for anything other than entertaining the experianced crew by having the less experinced look at the tail in various alarming conditions and very seldom installed in the rear housings in anger (if ever! although might have been when a 10 shed most of an engine over reading)