RNHF website update – 20 February 2008

What resolution is your screen set to? I know sometimes people have problems like that if they have low-res settings or if they have their favourites bar opened along the side of the screen instead of using the drop-down menu from the top (which takes up an inordinate amount of the viewing area of the screen).

Thanks Lee, did not think of that.

My own PC works fine but my works PC must have a different resolution as this is the machine I had problems with.

Brian.

……Actually TT, the Tipsy is a better example of a one-winged aeroplane, the single wing spar goes in one side and out t’other!!

Oh Lordy…!

TT

Actually I’m with you on that L&S, what happened to the Flycatchers flying career? Lovely looking aeroplane, this coming from a Gannet fan!

Dont encourage Steve, Pageno1 – he’ll work Luton Minors in somewhere!

:diablo:

……Actually TT, the Tipsy is a better example of a one-winged aeroplane, the single wing spar goes in one side and out t’other!!

PS. Not really getting off-topic here. The pics below were taken in the Fairey factory at Slough and G-AISA was originally delivered to the Fleet Air Arm’s flying club at Lee on Solent! 😉

Anyway, all credit to RNHF and BAe for getting LS326 back to airworthy conditions after horrific corrosion issues. Now if we wanted another FAA biplane(!) in the air, how about resuscitating the Fairey Flycatcher replica, now static in the FAA Museum?

Dont encourage Steve, Pageno1 – he’ll work Luton Minors in somewhere!

:diablo:

‘Its a four-winged slow aeroplane, and I’m sure the public love it!!’
L&S Dosen’t the bi in biplane mean two, and refers to the fact it has two wings?
A wing is just one wing, take the monoplane, because the one wing has a fusalage mounted in the middle (usually), dosen’t make it two wings. Even when there is little fusalage, The B-35 for instance, it is still just a wing.

This may well have been discussed in the past but what happened to the Firefly that crashed at Duxford?
The pictures that were shown at the time showed a mostly complete airframe, although news reports at the time said it was ‘destroyed’ surely many of the parts could be reused?

I am aware that the occupants tragically lost their lives in this crash but it hasn’t stopped other rebuilds. The Spitfire that crashed at Goodwood being rebuilt into the IAC model at Duxford comes to mind (Now repainted in Dutch colours).

John

…..but your average joe public will see it as another two winged slow aeroplane at an airshow, and they’re paying the money.

Its a four-winged slow aeroplane, and I’m sure the public love it!! :diablo:

Let’s just have another P-51D instead, so important to the Atlantic, Taranto, Bismarck, Channel Dash and other ‘unglamorous’ but historic battles. Bitter? Moi? :rolleyes:

Thats a good idea, lets pick on the P51D again, how about all those poxy Spitfires that keep getting rebiult.

Im with Bruce on this one, we really need to see a Firefly back in the air.
I will be controversial now, pre Swordfish or duplicates of, too boring. Great for enthusiasts of the period, but your average joe public will see it as another two winged slow aeroplane at an airshow, and they’re paying the money.

er- what about the Strathalen Firefly – Evelyn Tensions is sitting in the Conservation Centre…she WAS a flyer…..

TT

oooh lumme, theres a controversial one!

Why a Firefly? Late war/Korean era covered, WW2 covered……

Whilst a Seafire would be spiffing (and to all practical purposes even if one was available and so were the funds it would be a late mark either of Kennets if they were for sale, or the example in the States) the Furies already cover ‘that era’

Even a Cat would be WW2 which is covered by the Stringbaggery

what about the 30’s, a Nimrod might be nice 😉 🙂

IIRC FAA was formed in ’37….. we’ve established that later types are complex and expensive to operate so the Sea Hawk provides an end stop to later types perhaps? Nothing to say you cant go earlier…

TT

Could these also be sold as a potential source of revenue for say, the purchase of a replacement Firefly?

Discuss 🙂

OK! 😀

Who would buy them? Current Swordfish airframe projects exceed market demand, and have done so for the last few decades, IMHO. The CAF considered rebuilding the ex-MoF example to airworthy, but were put off by the engine and British airframe issues, despite it being a relatively ‘simple’ type, systems and performance-wise. And you can take a couple of friends.

VWoC have recently taken on the Bob Spence C-GEVS example, and I doubt there’s any other real Canadian opportunities.

Despite being one of Britain’s most important W.W.II engines, airworthy Pegasus engine projects are very rare – D1ck Melton trawled the world for one for his Walrus project, and got – one. My understanding is that the RNHF wouldn’t be able to operate three Stringbags concurrently due to engine shortages; that may be old or incorrect info, but there aren’t three zero-timed Peggies in the RNHF store, unless Lee knows something? Bear in mind that the Shearwater only machine flew by using a Carb off LS326, brought to Canada in John Beattie’s carry on Luggage…

Pity, but who cares? Let’s just have another P-51D instead, so important to the Atlantic, Taranto, Bismarck, Channel Dash and other ‘unglamorous’ but historic battles. Bitter? Moi? :rolleyes:

I’m going to be a tad controversial now…

It will be great to see LS326 back in the air. I wonder though if there are any current intentions to complete the other two and fly them.

Could these also be sold as a potential source of revenue for say, the purchase of a replacement Firefly?

Discuss 🙂

Bruce

‘Testing it on an MoD PC now – works here.’
Trying it on DARA PC and it is blocked – anyway I dont want to get int a discussion about it really.
Just be handy to have a bit of background info on the post sometimes.

Sea Fury sale?

Discussed already in this thread

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=78566

‘Have you tried clicking the word “HERE” in the news item? That is the hyperlink. Failing that, type “Disposal Services Authority” into Google and follow the link from there.’

MoD office PC won’t always follow HERE or hyperlinks, yes even when it’s RAF or FAA content!
Not an issue with your post here, but difficult and unhelpful when someone posts, ‘have you seen this…’ and no explanation with it.

BTW I have a fondness for the FAAHF loved their displays at VL and CU, and priviledged enough to have had tour around their hangar with John Beattie.
I think they missed some good opportunities in the past though, with an airworthy Sea Vixen and Gannet passing them by, but owning two Sea Furies and three Swordfish.
Hope they keep up the goodwork, and really enjoy seeing the Sea Fury and Sea Hawk displaying.

Testing it on an MoD PC now – works here.

Re “missed opportunities”, sadly Sea Vixens and Gannets are highly complex aircraft and thus demand a high manhour/flying hour ratio which inevitably means cost. This was one of the reasons why the Sea Hawk was not flown for many years as, despite it being a relatively basic jet, it still gobbles up manpower resources more than the other types. The Sea Harrier would have been even worse!

In an ideal world all such former FAA types would be retained, but it simply isn’t a viable option.

‘Have you tried clicking the word “HERE” in the news item? That is the hyperlink. Failing that, type “Disposal Services Authority” into Google and follow the link from there.’

MoD office PC won’t always follow HERE or hyperlinks, yes even when it’s RAF or FAA content!
Not an issue with your post here, but difficult and unhelpful when someone posts, ‘have you seen this…’ and no explanation with it.

BTW I have a fondness for the FAAHF loved their displays at VL and CU, and priviledged enough to have had tour around their hangar with John Beattie.
I think they missed some good opportunities in the past though, with an airworthy Sea Vixen and Gannet passing them by, but owning two Sea Furies and three Swordfish.
Hope they keep up the goodwork, and really enjoy seeing the Sea Fury and Sea Hawk displaying.

What resolution is your screen set to? I know sometimes people have problems like that if they have low-res settings or if they have their favourites bar opened along the side of the screen instead of using the drop-down menu from the top (which takes up an inordinate amount of the viewing area of the screen).

As ever Lee, very informative.

I do not know if it my browser but some of the pictures are covering the report so I could not read all of it.

Is it me or is it the web site?

Thanks.

Brian.