Which aerodrome?

I would say it was Henlow.

I went on ATC camp there in July 1965, and as Pagen says, there were a lot of aircraft gathered in store awaiting the opening of the RAF Museum. Among them were Lincoln RF398, which was parked outside the hangars like the one in shot, and Canberra B.2 WJ573, which was out to grass further out on the airfield. The Canberra was in the pale ‘PRU blue’ and grey colour scheme, and may be the one in the film. Also parked outside was Lancaster PA474, though this doesn’t appear in the film.

Happy Days

DD

I think you are all probably right, have a look at the pics here http://www.airfieldinformationexchange.org/community/showthread.php?454-Henlow

🙂

Both the RAF Museums’ Canberra PR.3 and its Avro Lincoln were kept in storage at their RAF Henlow facility in the late 1960s, that would give some credence to the film being shot at Henlow, however the hangars kind of look wrong to me aswel.
Nice film though, especially seeing the Shackleton (pre phase III) and Beverley in colour.

Edit, looking again, it does look like the big main hangar/workshops which sat isolated from the others at Henlow, and as Arm Waver says the stack would also be right.

Thanks chaps.

I don’t think the hangars are right for Henlow. I am an occasionally visitor there and flew there three weeks ago, with Des Penrose as it happens. All the hangars face one another, there isn’t a nice neat line as in the video. And a Canberra at Henlow on grass?

I would tend to agree – the tower looks very much like Henlow’s.

Looks like Henlow.

Looking at my 1953 Air Touring Guide
Toussus
Runway 078-258 3609 feet x 98 feet PSP
parrallel grass strip 2200 feet

I cannot think of anywhere else that has a layout that aircraft are parked in similar places in relation to the control tower

Toussus is a definite possibility. I wonder if the pattern of the tower was a one-off, or one widely used in France during the thirties.

These days their Easterly runway is aligned 07 rather than 08, but that could be magnetic variation – it is in the same approximate direction.

Moggy

I don’t know whether there was a “standard design” tower in France. Most of the small fields in my part of France don’t even have a tower nowadays! I’m assuming that the building is pre-war, so I’ll hunt around for images of pre-war terminal buildings in France to see whether they have any common design features. I might even strike lucky and find the one in the photo.

Anyhow I’ve looked again at the original photo which shows the terminal building to have, on the left hand side, a single storey wing, with a semi-circular end, on the same axis as the rest of the building. Assuming that the design is symetrical, it seems probable that there is the same on its right hand side (which is obscured by the aeroplanes). The photo of the building at Toussus doesn’t seem to be the same – its wings appear to be at 45º to the rest of the building (although the angle from which the photo was taken means that I cannot say this with certainty). I assume that the photo which I posted was taken in the fifties and that of Toussus is more recent. So it may be that the building at Toussus has changed over the years. Can anyone shed any more light on this?

Roger, read post 3 again:rolleyes:

Regards

John

Sorry – was late at night brain and fingers not in synch 😡

Roger Smith.

Roger, read post 3 again:rolleyes:

Regards

John

Toussus is a definite possibility. I wonder if the pattern of the tower was a one-off, or one widely used in France during the thirties.

These days their Easterly runway is aligned 07 rather than 08, but that could be magnetic variation – it is in the same approximate direction.

Moggy

could it be Toussus

My two pence is that the unreadable on the rudder is OO-??? . The twin tails suggest to me Chrislea Ace, but back to the question, where is it?:D

sort of Ercoupe?

Sure there is an Ercoupe there, but closer to the camera, behind/under the tail of the Nord, you can just make out the rear part of the aircraft that goes with the hinged canopy. If you look really closely you can even see the distinctive Miles tailwheel as fitted to Geminis and Messengers.

I’m not so sure it is a Gemini. It’s definately not a Messenger as there is no central fin/rudder. However for the tailwheeled Gemini that rear end looks to be to far off the ground – and the surfaces look very shiny, sort of metallic, sort of Ercoupe?

Roger Smith.

Edit – the more I look at it the more I think the open canopy and that twin tail are on two seperate aeroplanes – they are too far apart?

Maybe Cambridge (Teversham) opened in 1938

Definately not Cambridge.

I think I can say the aircraft behind the Nord is a Miles Gemini.* The hinged canopy is right, and the beacon behind the canopy is in the right position and it is possible to make out the tail surfaces behind the tail of the Nord. I say it is a Gemini rather than a Messenger because if it was a Messenger we could probably see the front part of the engine cowling in the rear window of the Nord. Just me two pence!

Can’t help with the aerodrome but there is an Ercoupe and a Messenger/Gemini in the line up. Can you read what is on that interesting rudder nearest the Q6.

John

Regrettably no. Not even with a magnifying glass. Mabe it’s my age and my eyesight! But it’s curious what you say about a Messenger/Gemini. I thought the same until I noticed that the glazing bar in the hinged canopy seems to run the wrong way for that. However I haven’t checked Don Brown’s book to see if that applies to all marks of the Messenger and Gemini. A job for tomorrow, perhaps!

Can’t help with the aerodrome but there is an Ercoupe and a Messenger/Gemini in the line up. Can you read what is on that interesting rudder nearest the Q6.

John

Maybe Cambridge (Teversham) opened in 1938