Page 15 – Key Publishing

keithmac

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 211 through 225 (of 259 total)

← 1 2 3 … 14 15 16 17 18 →

Author

Posts
March 28, 2002 at 9:31 pm in reply to: Historic aircraft engines salvage #2111851

keithmac
Participant

RE: Historic aircraft engines salvage

Hi Merlin,
I’ve recently been told that there’s a pair of radials lying in the Culbin Forest about 6 or 7 miles short of the Kinloss threshold. Reputidly from a Beaufighter. However as my informant produced a rocker arm and exhaust valve from one of them, it was’nt a Beaufighter! It’s more likely to be a Whitley, but my scanning of the records of Kinloss Whitley losses shows no Whitley in that exact location. I’m off to have a look over the weekend, but just to try and identify the wreck. Any of you Whitley fans know any more?
KeithMac.

March 26, 2002 at 11:28 pm in reply to: Another #2112014

keithmac
Participant

RE: The RAF during UDI

Hi Snoopy, I can’t confirm unofficially modified markings, or artwork showing sympathy for the Rhodesian cause, but I know that there was a distinct lack of enthusiasm for any action against the Rhodesians by most of the RAF. We did our “sabre rattling” as ordered and happily things went no further. I did hear that approaches were a bit tight, but nothing of RhAF escorts, however, I stayed in Kenya during the whole UDI episode so I’ve no first hand info on what actually happened down in Zambia.
KeithMac.

March 17, 2002 at 10:49 pm in reply to: RAF Fighter Command #2112407

keithmac
Participant

RE: RAF Fighter Command

If you’re working on a project why not go to the RAF Website at http://WWW.raf.mod.uk/rafhome.html you’ll find loads of info under the history section.
keithmac

March 17, 2002 at 9:44 pm in reply to: RAF Fighter Command #2112412

keithmac
Participant

RE: RAF Fighter Command

For the rest of the war fighter command continued to provide air defence for the UK as well as escorting bomber and fighter bomber sweeps against mainland europe. Post war they reverted to an air defence role initially with the Meteor, then with the Hunter and Javelin during the 50’s and early 60’s. By the early 60’s these had given way to the Lightning. Fighter and Bomber Commands were amalgamated in the mid 1960’s to become Strike Command.
KeithMac.

March 17, 2002 at 8:59 pm in reply to: Another #2112435

keithmac
Participant

RE: Another

Possibly. The flight refuelling system was a modification and was embodied in service, so it took a long time for it to be embodied fleet wide. In those days we had a limited tanker fleet and it was used to mostly support the Lightning which as you probably know had next to no endurance without being topped up in flight.
KeithMac.

March 15, 2002 at 8:42 pm in reply to: Bader book #2112546

keithmac
Participant

RE: Bader book

Be sensible, the autographed one (if it’s genuine) is probably going to be valuable. But I suggest you get the signature authenticated. The Air Historical Branch are bound to have Bader’s signature for comparison.
Keithmac.

March 15, 2002 at 7:05 pm in reply to: Another from the St Athan collection #2112557

keithmac
Participant

RE: Another from the St Athan collection

Hi Steve, Yes I know what you mean. As I was in charge of the collection at St Athan I had the luxury of being able to roll them outside on fine days and try to put them in a place where they would look reasonably “period” before I took the photo’s. It’s a pity that more of the museums don’t stage photo days during the summer. It’s a bit of an effort, but making an effort for the people who pay the bills (the enthusiast’s) should be a priority. I’ll try to get around to putting some more of my photo’s on this site. The Museum of Flight have just put 4 shots of my JU-87 on their site, but there’s a glitch at the moment and they are not showing up properly.
KeithMac.

March 15, 2002 at 6:56 pm in reply to: Junkers JU 88 #2112561

keithmac
Participant

RE: Junkers JU 88

Hi Jase, Would I be right in assuming that you are the JASE that worked for me on VASS at Laarbruch? If so, nice to hear from you. Where are you now? No it was’nt a wind up. The real aerials were removed and disappeared many moons ago. So we had to improvise. The main sections were indeed manufactured from broom handles and the other bits from welding rod. We made them as accurate as possible, but they are replica’s.
KeithMac.

March 14, 2002 at 6:51 pm in reply to: A couple of rare pics I found! #2112641

keithmac
Participant

RE: A couple of rare pics I found!

It certainly was, but then you’ve still got to move the thing around on the ground, so your into platforms with wheels, jacks, or lifting equipment and a lot of bother. Can you imagine a Jumbo load of fare paying passengers landing on a rubber runway – the bounce would smash the duty free’s!!!!!!!!

March 13, 2002 at 11:19 pm in reply to: A couple of rare pics I found! #2112686

keithmac
Participant

RE: A couple of rare pics I found!

Hello Nephew! I’ve just found this. I’m really not that old, I was 3 when this happened, and I was not an anchor clanker! However as you ask, 3 Sea Vampire 21s were modified for the trials which proved only that the system was a non starter. There was too much bounce, then the aircraft had to be jacked up and the gear lowered before they could be moved to the hangar. Not a good idea if you have a wave of aircraft returning from an operation. It was just one of the less clever ideas which got tried out. Some succeeded, like angle decks and mirror landing systems, which our American chums still use today! Which only proves that you have to try out all the silly ideas if you are going to progress!
Uncle KeithMac

March 12, 2002 at 9:50 pm in reply to: Junkers JU 88 #2112735

keithmac
Participant

RE: Junkers JU 88

Hi Nephews I’ve been away a while. Yes it was me that restored it. You can see my piccies of the aircraft after restoration if you go to the East Fortune website at http://WWW.NMS.AC.UK/flight. Hope you like them!
Uncle KeithMac.

February 23, 2002 at 11:47 pm in reply to: Airshow prices… #2114180

keithmac
Participant

RE: Airshow prices…

PS. When I referred to the 40 who worked bloody hard to bring you the show, I was only referring to the engineering team. There were others who work equally hard, and I did’nt include them amoungst the “Hangers on”.
KeithMac.

February 23, 2002 at 11:39 pm in reply to: Airshow prices… #2114185

keithmac
Participant

RE: Airshow prices…

Hi Nephews, I can perhaps add something to this debate as I was part of the engineering support team for the IAT for 10 years, so I can make some informed comment. Firstly Roger S is a little wrong on 2 points. The parking of the aircraft is determined by 2 main factors which are, whether they were going to be static or flying and secondly by the physical layout of the airfield. It’s also influenced to a degree by when the aircraft arrive, or if they arrive at all! I can assure you that the engineering crews worked for days before trying to get the parking right, we did’nt always succeed. The comment about making promises and not keeping them is a bit unfair. Aircraft go unserviceable and often don’t show, I’ve experienced this both at IAT and also when trying to launch aircraft of my own bound for airshows. However, having said all that, the discussion is about the price of tickets. I and the other 40 or so volunteers who worked bloody hard for a week to bring you the show supplied our services free of charge. We were fed and accommodated in sometimes pretty squalid conditions, but we did it because we were all guys who liked aeroplanes. What began to annoy me however, and David Burke hit on it, was the amount of cash lavished upon the visiting aircrew, and particularly the big party on the sunday night after the show. Also as the years went by, the number of non productive “hangers on” who also seemed to be fed and watered, and the number of VIP guests. In the end I got so annoyed at the squandering of money which should have gone to the RAFBF that I withdrew my services. I think the £30 a ticket would be valid if the bulk of it went to the Benevolent Fund, (I may need it in a few years), but it’s not valid when a substantial portion of the cash is spent entertaining visiting crews in an over generous manner, and as a result, the average aviation enthusiast is being overcharged for entry. Anyone want to come back on this?

KeithMac

February 20, 2002 at 11:17 pm in reply to: Request for Uncle Keithmac! #2114492

keithmac
Participant

RE: Request for Uncle Keithmac!

Hi Steve, The difference between a prop and a turbine is that the prop is converting engine power into thrust, while a turbine is extracting power from the Gas flow to drive the Compressor. So no, the angle of attack on the turbine blades does not progressively increase. The number of turbines you have depends upon the number of compressors you have to drive and how much of the power you want to extract from the gas flow.
Uncle KeithMac

February 18, 2002 at 7:17 pm in reply to: Request for Uncle Keithmac! #2114787

keithmac
Participant

RE: Request for Uncle Keithmac!

OK Folks, good answers. Here’s some info:
The two props are to convert all the engine power to thrust without having very big discs.
They rotate in opposite directions to cancel out the torque on the aircraft.
The front prop has a greater diameter so that the tip vortex does not hit the rear prop – this would cause vibration and noise.
The pitch is controlled by the front prop and is transmitted to the rear prop by a translation unit.
Because the airflow leaving the front prop has been acceellerated, the rear prop has to have a coarser pitch, usually around 1 degree coarser so that it will have the correct angle of attack to produce it’s share of the thrust.
Hope that’s clear!!

Would you like one on Jets for a change?

KeithMac
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 211 through 225 (of 259 total)

← 1 2 3 … 14 15 16 17 18 →