Britten Norman Islander/Trislander

[NARSES2]

RN wouldn't be able to rustle that many deck crew nowadays 

[Weaver]

RN wouldn't be able to rustle that many deck crew nowadays 

In the Harrier-carrier days you could've taken the same picture, but in that case the deck crew would be the 'cost-efficent' human arrestor system who were stopping the Islander from going over the bow. I mean, if it worked in 1916, it'll work now, right?

p.s. Baggsy not being the innermost 'arrestor hand' on either side...

[Weaver]

This month's (July's) Aeroplane Magazine has an excellent Database article on the Islander, and next month they're doing the Trilander. Should be an early Christmas for anyone interested in the type.

[Martin H]

IIRC the OV-10 and even a C-130 was tested for carrier operations! There also were serious thoughts to create a COD aircraft from the DC-9 airliner!

And from the BAe146/Avro RJ (I've seen the drawings) and the Fokker F28 (not a typo: the twin-jet airliner).

The 146 would have had an F-4K style telescoping nose leg, not for take-off attitude, but in order to get the top of the tail low enough to get into a USN carrier's hangar.

Harro built the F28 a few years back.

Ive also seen artwork for a 737 200 based COD on approach to a carrier with a bloody great hook dangling.
I suppose for UK requirements the Islander would have done for light Fleet's, as would the Skyvan or its cousin the Shorts 330 for CVA01 and the like.........assuming the Blackburn 139 didnt happen.

[Weaver]

IIRC the OV-10 and even a C-130 was tested for carrier operations! There also were serious thoughts to create a COD aircraft from the DC-9 airliner!

And from the BAe146/Avro RJ (I've seen the drawings) and the Fokker F28 (not a typo: the twin-jet airliner).

The 146 would have had an F-4K style telescoping nose leg, not for take-off attitude, but in order to get the top of the tail low enough to get into a USN carrier's hangar.

Harro built the F28 a few years back.

Ive also seen artwork for a 737 200 based COD on approach to a carrier with a bloody great hook dangling.
I suppose for UK requirements the Islander would have done for light Fleet's, as would the Skyvan or its cousin the Shorts 330 for CVA01 and the like.........assuming the Blackburn 139 didnt happen.

That raises the prospect/spectre of a Skyvan with huge (relatively) Nimrod AEW-style fore-and-aft radomes...      

Folding wings on either an Islander or a Skyvan would be doable and interesting. Even if they were too tall to go in the hangar, it would save deck parking space.

I wonder how an Islander would have coped with the ski-jump on the SHAR-refitted Hermes?

[NARSES2]

Folding wings on either an Islander or a Skyvan would be doable and interesting. Even if they were too tall to go in the hangar, it would save deck parking space.

Double fold as per Gannet and a few others, or would the engines get in the way ?

[Weaver]

Folding wings on either an Islander or a Skyvan would be doable and interesting. Even if they were too tall to go in the hangar, it would save deck parking space.

Double fold as per Gannet and a few others, or would the engines get in the way ?

Just thinking about keeping it simple. For the COD role, the aircraft isn't going to be based on the carrier, it'll just be there long enough to fill up with mail and any crew who are leaving, and then it'll be off. If it's doing AEW that's a different matter, of course.

[Gondor]

Folding wings on either an Islander or a Skyvan would be doable and interesting. Even if they were too tall to go in the hangar, it would save deck parking space.

Double fold as per Gannet and a few others, or would the engines get in the way ?

Or fold the wings back along the fuselage, hinge point just outside the engines.

[PR19_Kit]

Didn't someone REALLY land an Islander on a carrier once? I'm sure I've seen a pic of it sitting on the deck, it didn't even need a hook or a catapult!

[Weaver]

Didn't someone REALLY land an Islander on a carrier once? I'm sure I've seen a pic of it sitting on the deck, it didn't even need a hook or a catapult!

There's pictures of it earlier in this thread (post #12): G-AVUB landed on Hermes on 28 May 1968 and took off again.

[PR19_Kit]

That'll be it then. 

[NARSES2]

Folding wings on either an Islander or a Skyvan would be doable and interesting. Even if they were too tall to go in the hangar, it would save deck parking space.

Double fold as per Gannet and a few others, or would the engines get in the way ?

Just thinking about keeping it simple. For the COD role, the aircraft isn't going to be based on the carrier, it'll just be there long enough to fill up with mail and any crew who are leaving, and then it'll be off. If it's doing AEW that's a different matter, of course.

[NARSES2]

Folding wings on either an Islander or a Skyvan would be doable and interesting. Even if they were too tall to go in the hangar, it would save deck parking space.

Double fold as per Gannet and a few others, or would the engines get in the way ?

Or fold the wings back along the fuselage, hinge point just outside the engines.

Yup, could do 

[Weaver]

The thing with wing-fold is that you have to be careful about adding unladen weight to an Islander, especially if you want it to go far out to sea with safety margins. The difference between empty and max TO weight is only about 3000lb, and increasing the passenger load from 5 to 10 drops the range from 800 miles to 170 miles. That's why I say make it VERY simple: unpowered, and with a simple, single-fold up and over. It's also worth remembering that the fuel tanks are in the wings, outboard of the engines, so any wing fold would either have to be outboard of the tanks, inboard of them (complicates the fuel system) or in the middle of them (adds weight AND complicates the fuel system).

[Weaver]

Just noticed a peculiarity of the Airfix Islander kit: the plastic has the triangular, extended-span, fuel-bearing wingtips that were first adopted for the Trilander (I think), but which are a standard option on any airframe. However all the drawings for the three colour schemes included feature the square-cut "dry" wingtips. As far as I can tell from online photos, the triangular tip are wrong for both Aurigny and Milford Sound Sightseeing (the two civvie schemes on the decal sheet) and only right for the Phillipine Navy option.

Note that this is the A03067 boxing with a frameless, full-size picture on the front of a yellow Aurigny Air machine.