I agree 100% pal, personally taking time of construction into account and technology changes. I think its one of the greatest combat aircraft ever produced.
Have a mate who worked for BAE, his mantra was if you wanted to impress foriegn dignatorys with a flashy bit of kit you rolled out the Typhoons (after you'd frigged a few systems to get it airborne) if you wanted a proper job doing you got out the Tornado, old school tech that was crucially reliable and never let you down
In my RAF days on AS&TF (Aircraft Salvage & Transportation Flight, better known as Smash and Crash) I was on the team that dismantled Tornado PO2 at RAF Honington and transported it to RAF Laarbruch, Germany, where it was going to be used as a Battle Damage Repair (BDR) airframe. PO2 is the jet that had a camera in the fin and filmed its flight through some valleys, possibly mach loop. Not a good end for a piece of aviation history.
One of the bonuses of growing up where I did during the '70s and '80s was that friends from NATO came to belly rup fighters on the treetops on their way to the Hjerkinn bombing range. We got loads for F-16 since neither of the 3 other European nations of the original consortium are predominantly known for their mountains. But I also got to see German and American F-4s, British and American Harriers, and F-15s. British Jaguars were always a fantastic thing to see as were the joys when the French came visiting with their Dasaults and when the Americans joined in with their swept wing F-111 in addition to pretty much everything else NATO had flying (I never got to see the F-14, unfortunately) There is however one sight that my brain is still trying to process, from the mid-90s as I was pierced on the side of a 2300-meter-tall mountain in Eastern Jotunheimen with the plateau some 600 meters below me. First came some high-altitude fighters (Tornados and F-15 I believe) in what I presume were high overwatch/air superiority formations. Then came 4 F-16s hugging the plateau and just behind them came two absolutely massive B-1Bs skimming over the landscape below me with swept wings. There is just something about a swing-wing fighter the size of a Boeing 737 pretending to be a cruise missile that makes the brain go "This makes zero sense", while reinforcing the feeling I had developed over 2 decades of seeing NATO friends training, later training with them: I am glad I am on team blue". The Tornado was a big intimidating boy at eye level and back in the 80s it was probably just the Swedish Viggen that could match it in a belly-rubbing competition, though the French sure enjoyed picking mushrooms in their Mirage 2000 and Norwegian F-16 pilots soon discovered that playing hide and seek in the mountains with the F-16 was even more fun than with the outgoing F-5. The F-111 was even chunkier than the Tornado. The B-1b doing what it was designed for, however, that is still scrambling my brain since nothing that big should ever go that low and fast (and loud!) I am still happy to be on Team Blue (and delighted that Finland and Sweden joined in). PS - the two Norwegian F-35 squadrons have the numbers 332 and 331. These numbers come from the RAF during WW2 when Norwegians flew Spitfires for the RAF. An easy way to remember that when shared efforts are needed, shared efforts will come together.
I am in Lincolnshire wolds( low flying area) and Years ago had two come over my house at night flat out about 300ft . Missed the first one ran outside And saw the second one. I swear the ground shook ! I Followed it on the flight tracker and I guess they were simulating an attack of one of the oil refineries on the coast.
@@dabrab Indeed. They should have called the Buccaneer, 'The Qualcast' because they used to cut the grass they flew so low. A superb piece of kit. I read somewhere that the MoD has a number of Buccaneers mothballed.......Be great if it was true.
The TONKA in it's natural environment The aircraft was honed to go fast and smoothly at the lowest of levels in all weather. The high wing loading and the fly by wire system made it so smooth. I dread to think how horrendous it must be for F15E pilots by comparison.
@sandyhamilton8783 I believe there were minimum speeds at certain wing angles, swept back obviously being faster. Would be interesting to now what the min was at 67 degrees, might get an idea how fast this pass was. Looks alot faster than passes we see today which are usually around 300 to 350 knotts
Yes, but the F15 doesn't typically need to go so low down. In fact, during the Gulf conflict, the Tornados had to switch from low level to medium altitude operations to avoid getting shot down. But higher up, the Tornado's higher wing loading was a disadvantage.
Like the f14, old school technology no longer used. Always have to respect the evolution that continues to unfold as these prenominal machines develop. This is what F1 is to the automobile industry.
@@ukmachloopIIRC the ADV (F2/F3) had automatic wing sweep, IDS (GR1) had manual wing sweep. Not sure about GR4 as I was only involved in the relatively early days of IDS in 1979-1982 when working at CDMT in Camberley, Surrey.
@ you’re probably right, I’m not sure exactly what the upgrades were. I didn’t think that the Luftwaffe, MarineFlieger or the Italian air force had automatic wing sweep on their GR1 as the flight control software was common.
I've seen them wings back in North Wales/ML back in the day and they weren't hanging about. I'm guessing that with the wings back less lift is compensated for by more thrust, so there's a stall vs break-even point?
The Pilot was told it was the Mach Stick .... pull it to go fast ... but must have misunderstood it to be the Mach Loop stick !!! It happens sometimes when we pull the wrong sticks for the wrong purpose. c'est la vie !!!
Don't let anyone tell you otherwise: the Tonka was a quite brilliant low level strike aircraft.
I agree 100% pal, personally taking time of construction into account and technology changes. I think its one of the greatest combat aircraft ever produced.
Hence initial RAF deployment with IX squadron and 617 squadron.
So no-one has any kind of issue that the Germands and Italians still fly them. Good.
Have a mate who worked for BAE, his mantra was if you wanted to impress foriegn dignatorys with a flashy bit of kit you rolled out the Typhoons (after you'd frigged a few systems to get it airborne) if you wanted a proper job doing you got out the Tornado, old school tech that was crucially reliable and never let you down
@nobbytart27 love the Typhoon passing but tornados still my favourite aircraft
I wonder if we knew each other, I worked at Warton Bae on tornados, jaguar, and even the canberra
In my RAF days on AS&TF (Aircraft Salvage & Transportation Flight, better known as Smash and Crash) I was on the team that dismantled Tornado PO2 at RAF Honington and transported it to RAF Laarbruch, Germany, where it was going to be used as a Battle Damage Repair (BDR) airframe. PO2 is the jet that had a camera in the fin and filmed its flight through some valleys, possibly mach loop. Not a good end for a piece of aviation history.
@seanjoseph8637 just out of curiosity do you know what the min rec speed was for a 67 degree wing?
I did 30 yrs in RAF and it was always known as Crash and Smash not the other way round.
@@willxv226 Yeah, alcohol had a lot to do with that particular post. I'm even a member of the facebook group and got it wrong!!
@@ukmachloop I have no idea, I didn't work on them and it wouldn't mean anything to a mechanic anyway, designers and pilots need to know that stuff.
Love the analysis matey... good job again. Great channel. Trying to spread the word pal. 👍
Much appreciated
One of the bonuses of growing up where I did during the '70s and '80s was that friends from NATO came to belly rup fighters on the treetops on their way to the Hjerkinn bombing range. We got loads for F-16 since neither of the 3 other European nations of the original consortium are predominantly known for their mountains. But I also got to see German and American F-4s, British and American Harriers, and F-15s. British Jaguars were always a fantastic thing to see as were the joys when the French came visiting with their Dasaults and when the Americans joined in with their swept wing F-111 in addition to pretty much everything else NATO had flying (I never got to see the F-14, unfortunately)
There is however one sight that my brain is still trying to process, from the mid-90s as I was pierced on the side of a 2300-meter-tall mountain in Eastern Jotunheimen with the plateau some 600 meters below me. First came some high-altitude fighters (Tornados and F-15 I believe) in what I presume were high overwatch/air superiority formations. Then came 4 F-16s hugging the plateau and just behind them came two absolutely massive B-1Bs skimming over the landscape below me with swept wings. There is just something about a swing-wing fighter the size of a Boeing 737 pretending to be a cruise missile that makes the brain go "This makes zero sense", while reinforcing the feeling I had developed over 2 decades of seeing NATO friends training, later training with them: I am glad I am on team blue".
The Tornado was a big intimidating boy at eye level and back in the 80s it was probably just the Swedish Viggen that could match it in a belly-rubbing competition, though the French sure enjoyed picking mushrooms in their Mirage 2000 and Norwegian F-16 pilots soon discovered that playing hide and seek in the mountains with the F-16 was even more fun than with the outgoing F-5. The F-111 was even chunkier than the Tornado. The B-1b doing what it was designed for, however, that is still scrambling my brain since nothing that big should ever go that low and fast (and loud!)
I am still happy to be on Team Blue (and delighted that Finland and Sweden joined in). PS - the two Norwegian F-35 squadrons have the numbers 332 and 331. These numbers come from the RAF during WW2 when Norwegians flew Spitfires for the RAF. An easy way to remember that when shared efforts are needed, shared efforts will come together.
I am in Lincolnshire wolds( low flying area) and Years ago had two come over my house at night flat out about 300ft . Missed the first one ran outside And saw the second one. I swear the ground shook ! I Followed it on the flight tracker and I guess they were simulating an attack of one of the oil refineries on the coast.
@@Thereaintnoharddeckoverleeshou they come down to 200 approx in the loop
They were exceptionally good at the low level stuff.
@@chrisfox3161 don't see anything go through at that pace now
If you want really low level stuff you need the Buccaneer! BTW I'm not biased I worked on both types.
@@dabrab Indeed. They should have called the Buccaneer, 'The Qualcast' because they used to cut the grass they flew so low. A superb piece of kit. I read somewhere that the MoD has a number of Buccaneers mothballed.......Be great if it was true.
Just saying, Maverick should have asked the RAF to perform the bombing run…
@@feliscorax 😄
The TONKA in it's natural environment The aircraft was honed to go fast and smoothly at the lowest of levels in all weather. The high wing loading and the fly by wire system made it so smooth. I dread to think how horrendous it must be for F15E pilots by comparison.
@sandyhamilton8783 I believe there were minimum speeds at certain wing angles, swept back obviously being faster. Would be interesting to now what the min was at 67 degrees, might get an idea how fast this pass was. Looks alot faster than passes we see today which are usually around 300 to 350 knotts
Yes, but the F15 doesn't typically need to go so low down. In fact, during the Gulf conflict, the Tornados had to switch from low level to medium altitude operations to avoid getting shot down. But higher up, the Tornado's higher wing loading was a disadvantage.
I think the terrain following radar auto pilot was the main thing. You could program the whole mission in advance and it would pretty much fly itself.
Like the f14, old school technology no longer used. Always have to respect the evolution that continues to unfold as these prenominal machines develop. This is what F1 is to the automobile industry.
@apaul13150 the Europeans got automatic sweeping wings, imagine having to pull that lever whilst in a dig fight
@@ukmachloopIIRC the ADV (F2/F3) had automatic wing sweep, IDS (GR1) had manual wing sweep. Not sure about GR4 as I was only involved in the relatively early days of IDS in 1979-1982 when working at CDMT in Camberley, Surrey.
@MRCAGR1 I thought the RAF only had the manual option even on the GR4
@ you’re probably right, I’m not sure exactly what the upgrades were. I didn’t think that the Luftwaffe, MarineFlieger or the Italian air force had automatic wing sweep on their GR1 as the flight control software was common.
The first aircraft had its wings at 67 degree sweepback, whereas the second one was only at 45 degrees
@nitram419 yep
Yeah that tells me the front one had the wings overswept for show and was not that fast
That is what tornado was made for
@@VolkerGoller amazing aircraft, gutted they had to go
I've seen them wings back in North Wales/ML back in the day and they weren't hanging about. I'm guessing that with the wings back less lift is compensated for by more thrust, so there's a stall vs break-even point?
Yep there were min speeds for each angle, would be good to know what that point was at 67 degrees as some indication of the speed on this video
@@carlmason1959 My thoughts too🤔👍👍
Rare to to see them swept back
Swept back for high speed flight .... Forward for low and landings
@petersmith7126 can't remember seeing a swept back tornado through the loop before. Anyone know the min speed required for a 67 degree wing?
@@ukmachloop 0.70 Mach
High level cross country?
Wow!!
I didn't know the Tornado had the same control stick as the F-18.
My Favourite war plan.
Holy shit
@@LowkeyLukeDnB great passes these, absolute beast of an aircraft
@@carlmason1959Absolute beast of a flight team, too!
First time I heard the AIRPLANE go wwwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Thanks for watching
Wonder if pilot knew they were swept back.
@@Dekmoore he would have had to pull them back manually
The Pilot was told it was the Mach Stick .... pull it to go fast ... but must have misunderstood it to be the Mach Loop stick !!!
It happens sometimes when we pull the wrong sticks for the wrong purpose. c'est la vie !!!
@@nevillecreativitymentor What a load of arse! I worked on these on 617 Sqn.