I would have thought that easyJet would have gone for the A320/1 of the Airbus range but Airliner World poll on their main website give an option of the A319 or B737-700!
I thought I was in good knowledge of easyJet goign for the A320/1 due to size compared to A319 but am I wrong???
By: 7clive - 30th May 2016 at 10:46
OTU
Nice shot. Just as I said, the faired over nose turret was not at all unusual on OTU aircraft.
Hi you seem to have forgot that an OTU Operational Training Unit was carrying out missions so removing the forward defence would not be an option at that time.Also as part of their training they would be involved with the BDTU’s as at 14 OTU RAF Market Harborough . I am going to the National Archives next month to look at 14 OTU’s operational records for Cottesmore /Market Harborough maybe there will be a reference to that photo. Regards Clive. I have just found a report by Bomber Command sent to the Air Ministry in May 1944 saying in future all Wellington Squadron nose turrets are to be stripped out and the OTUs are to be faired over. So you were better informed than me and at least that has solved the mystery I thankyou for your knowledge.Clive
By: CeBro - 26th May 2016 at 09:55
So, the Wimpy in the photograph has the turret removed and replaced by the wood and fabric covered fairing, but keeping the aerodynamic blister originally intended for the
fn5 in place.
Cees
By: Arabella-Cox - 26th May 2016 at 09:10
The fairings were fabric covered wood frameworks. So the lines are real not photographic illusions.
By: CeBro - 25th May 2016 at 15:47
Indeed, you can see the diagonal lines in the fairing (which is in store at Cosford presumably), in the pic Clive sent it looks like diagonal lines too, or this is an illusion
caused by the photographs grain.
Cees
By: Steve Bond - 25th May 2016 at 15:33
Taken at Heathrow many years before the RAF Museum put a front turret back into it.
By: CeBro - 25th May 2016 at 13:06
Here’s a pic by Peter Arnold showing the nose fairing from MF628 before the conversion.
Cees
By: Steve Bond - 25th May 2016 at 12:28
Yes it is.
By: CeBro - 25th May 2016 at 11:25
Ahh interesting, so that is the fairing for the FN5 turret at the top.
Cees
By: Steve Bond - 25th May 2016 at 11:23
Well not quite. MF628, like all T.10 conversions, had the nose turret removed completely. The OTU aircraft in the photo still has its turret in place, it has simply had the guns and innards removed and then been fabric’ed over.
By: CeBro - 25th May 2016 at 10:37
Wellington MF628 also had this fairing.
Cees
By: Steve Bond - 25th May 2016 at 10:08
Nice shot. Just as I said, the faired over nose turret was not at all unusual on OTU aircraft.
By: 7clive - 25th May 2016 at 09:32
Hi just added the image Clive.
By: Steve Bond - 19th May 2016 at 18:19
Sos did OTU Wellingtons late on in the war and early post-war period, as front turrets were deemed unnecessary. And just to be clear it is Mk.III (3) rather than Mk.111 (one hundred and eleven).
By: Rockhopper - 19th May 2016 at 13:02
The aircraft used for degaussing often had the front turret removed.
By: me109g4 - 19th May 2016 at 12:23
A pic may help,,,but then some here might now already.
By: Ren Frew - 7th July 2004 at 00:31
Sounds like the beez kneez for bees in the breeze at ease ! 😮
By: MANAIRPORTMAD - 6th July 2004 at 21:59
Strange! This is the 1st year bees have made a nest in the bird-box in my back garden!
By: Bmused55 - 6th July 2004 at 21:28
Perhaps this is Silver Snappers attempt to scare loganair from GLA so they base in EDI LOL
By: RIPConcorde - 6th July 2004 at 20:56
They were obviously attracted to the wonderful BA livery 😉
What a well written article, didn’t get anything wrong as far as I can see. Theres a first!
Wouldn’t expect anything less from The Scotsman. 🙂
By: Mark L - 6th July 2004 at 20:55
They were obviously attracted to the wonderful BA livery 😉
What a well written article, didn’t get anything wrong as far as I can see. Theres a first!
Sign In
September 30, 2002 at 11:01 pm