Took my kids to the families open day at RAF Coningsby today to show them where I used to work and watch the flying.

@DylanGuy I think there’s a two seater variant still airworthy in South Africa. They use it for high altitude sorties.

@WintaTheAngle that's surprising. i would have thought it to be a museum piece.

@DylanGuy It should, it’s 1960s tech. But it’s performance at high altitude matches or in exceeds some modern aircraft so they kept it running.

I was just checking up on it and sadly it crashed at an airshow killing the crew. The inquiry verdict was poor maintenance of the aircraft by the South African Airforce.

That’s the problem with this beautiful aircraft, it’s expensive to maintain an airworthy 60 year old aircraft.

So there are now no airworthy examples.

@WintaTheAngle it's expensive to maintain any aircraft that old.
I dislike how the manufacture of aircraft is conducted like cars, there is almost no chance of building new airframes of older designs, same with parts.
So you get machines that are reasonable in maintenance costs at the start, but eventually there is no way to replace them and as they age more parts require inspection, maintenance, replacements.
eventually even the parts are no longer factory produced so replacements need to be custom machined.

There are existing old designs with good modern potential and nobody considers rebuilding them and testing their viability.

rant over.
Just feels like a waste sometimes.

@DylanGuy I think you have to remember these are military aircraft designed to perform a specific role for a period of time of probably only 20-30 years by which time technology has moved on and they are obsolete.

There’s no point maintaining them beyond their role capabilities. They are killing machines - all be it beautiful ones, not recreational craft.

The Lightning was designed as a jet interceptor to meet the threat of soviet bombers approaching the U.K. via the north sea. This means their airframes have experienced 20 years of high speed altitude climbs in a short distance, even before they left RAF service in 1988. Airframe fatigue alone is the biggest issue with aircraft from this era which is why the Avro Vulcan also no longer flies. The airframe is to the jet what a chassis is to a car. It can’t just be replaced. To keep a high speed aircraft flying 30 years after the airframe’s service life just isn’t viable.

You can do it with WW2 aircraft because they operate under less stress and their inner wires are less complicated. But as tech marches on, it becomes a bigger challenge.

@WintaTheAnglemodern aircraft are no different. They fatigue and need more repairs over time.
with modern materials and manufacturing techniques, old airframes could be built stronger. they wouldn't be imune to fatigue but they would last longer than the originals did.
modern weapons technology also allows for many differently capable aircraft to take on very different roles. The idea that a plane can only do what it's airframe was designed for is an outdated one.

And older airframe designs aren't quite obsolete if they have better performance metrics than current aircraft with stronger engines.
I know how military procurement works and it's largely business. more money to be made if making a new plane from scratch than revisiting old designs.

@DylanGuy Okay I feel this has become more about opinion than what actually happens so I’ll leave it there.

@WintaTheAngle that's french for "you are wrong and i'll let you know it by walking away."
not meant as a comeback, just me being silly ;)

seriously though. a lot of what makes aircraft today good is the computer tech that is installed in them. old designs can be modified and built new for far less then what it takes to develop a new airframe these days.

i don't really like arguments but i do enjoy conversation. you can hit me up whenever 🙂👍