Haynes Aircraft Manuals

I liked both Haynes books on the Lanc and Spitfire. In general the available books on aircraft types are similar (history, development, service history yawn always the same photographs). Personally I am a great fan about the books regarding restoration, recovery etc of aircraft. I have most books about the restoration of the Blenheims, the Messerschmitt, Hurricane, CWH Lanc, a lot of Spitfire restoration books etc. And these are excellent reads and never bore me. I would like to see more of this kind of books instead of another ::::::history. I hope a book like that will be published on the recovery and restoration of Halifax NA337.

Cheers

Cees

Haynes are just doing something a little different, producing fun books in the process.

My thoughts exactly, surely these books are fairly light reading material for enthusiasts and people who want to learn a bit more about how an aircraft is put together – not a basis for stripping down a Lancaster. Just have to witness the hundreds of sheet rawings and APs that are involved with real aircraft projects.

Just as an observation from someone mechanical, not even the car ones are always held in high regard. Some of the earlier (Rover 2000/3500 example) are fantastic, but some of the manuals are very vague, and in some casses contain mistakes.

There’s also a Haynes manual on sex, but I wouldn’t use that as my main source for strip down and operating procedures!

Then again, the actual manuals for the Lancaster, Spitfire etc have been in print on and off for years, and can be easily obtained. Haynes are just doing something a little different, producing fun books in the process.

I don’t know about a “fortune” but publishers seem to make a few bob from aviation publishing. It’s us poor blokes that write the stuff who get the down side of the business, doing the work but getting the least amount of cash for their efforts. It’s true that aviation publishing has never been exactly lucrative for the writer/photographer, but in recent years the situation has got even worse. Some publishers still pay the authors the kind of figures that were on offer ten or twenty years ago. Consequently, it’s little wonder that so many new books are not particularly exciting or imaginative; you can’t really expect authors to put their heart and soul into a project which pays less than working over at the local McDonalds.

I agree that Haynes have a business to run, and guess you can’t blame them for capitalising on a good sales pitch. But it just seems like a great shame that they couldn’t have used the format to produce some real manuals that really did look at aircraft in detail. Although the concept might not have been an all-time best seller, it would have been refreshing to see a truly new angle on such over-published subjects.

Don’t know if it is ‘cynical’ or not, but it is business, and nobody makes a fortune from publishing aviation literature.

As mentioned above, any in-depth technical content would go over the head of 90% of the readership, who neither know nor care how to adjusty the oleo dampers in a Lancaster tailwheel ( if it has such things!).

You can do that for a MG Midget, because it is small, and quite simple, and there are many owners who actively need the technical details. For a large aeroplane, it would be 15 Volumes, and if all the UK Lancaster owners bought a complete copy, you would make three sales.

That said, the Tiger Moth is simple enough to make it reasonable to provide more engineering detail without consuming whole rain-forests, and it is possible that the editorial content could move more in that direction.

However, any Tiger rebuilder/restorer HAS to refer to existing manuels which already contain comprehensive instructions and specs, so duplicating more than a flavour of that for an enthusiasts’ publication is fairly pointless.

I agree that the manuals are very disappointing. I used to write books for Haynes but they lost their way when the aviation section was transferred to Sutton Publishing and they’ve never produced anything of any significance ever since. The manuals are just a cynical use of the “Haynes Manual” title and theme, but when you open the book, it’s simply another generic WWII publication. It’s a shame, as they could have produced books which really were more like manuals, but of course it’s all about promotion and sales, rather than actual content. It’s a missed opportunity in my opinion.

Given the popularity of the Haynes/BBMF collaborations, it would be a shame for them not to cover the Hurricane too.

There is one underway on the Tiger Moth, on which certain forum members have very significant input.

schematics, system diagrams, even pictures of how the mainwheel is held on…. please something almost technical…:D

There is one underway on the Tiger Moth, on which certain forum members have very significant input.

I agree that as a starting point to a strip-down /rebuild of either aircraft they are woefully inadequate, and rely far too much on photographs, but surely that was never the intention of the authors.

I do agree with that though ! Or you would end up with a massive collection of books just for 1 aircraft !
What I meant was they could have included some photo’s from when the work was done on PA474 & NX611 ie, the stripdown required for the main spar etc.. nothing major just some detailed photo’s !:)

I agree that as a starting point to a strip-down /rebuild of either aircraft they are woefully inadequate, and rely far too much on photographs, but surely that was never the intention of the authors. As an introduction to those who never have and never will have their bottoms on the seat of a Spitfire or Lancaster they will find a place.To condense the technical data for the types from ‘proper’ type manuals which must stretch to hundreds, if not thousands of pages would be beyond the scope of these volumes, which, let’s face it have been relatively cheaply produced for a niche in a certain market. For those with with a deeper interest in aircraft handling, by all means get the ‘Pilot’s Notes’ , be they original or facsimile, but if you accept, as I agree, that these ‘Manuals’ are rather lightweight, maybe even tongue-in -cheek, then they’re ‘ no better than the oughter be !’
Maybe those with clout like some of you lads with a hands-on approach to preservation and rebuilding can approach Haynes for a meatier series of volumes, but I doubt if anything more that the coffee-table type of conversation piece would appear at the end of it, and only those with the wherewithal and really deep interest could fork out the kind of cash as for the other ‘Spitfire’ manual which was mentioned recently on this forum. As a bit of light-hearted fun I think they’re OK. Particularly like the ‘Supermarine Spitfire 1936 onwards (all marks) Don’t tell me someone’s not taking the proverbial!:p Brian S.

I love them as books, but anyone would be mad to expect them to be true manuals for the aircraft!

I seem to recall our very own Fluffy telling us that there wasn’t going to be one for the Hurricane.

I agree with you, the Haynes manual was made to show people how to do things… The original haynes was based on a complete stripdown & rebiuld.

I got the Lanc one & was expecting alot of technical info etc.. but to avail, not much there !

Dispite the fact that I’m named in the Lancaster manual, I’m actually dissapointed with both the Lanc and the Spitfire manuals. I would have liked to see more technical information regarding the aircraft – more like the car versions. I’m probably on my own here, but I really don’t feel that full value was achieved with either of them. Sorry.:(