That was part of the problem, every time the aircraft was moved it was dismantled, crated, moved, then rebuilt. A lot of the time the guys who were tasked with the job had no real interest in the aircraft from an enthusiasts point of view, so they were not overly careful how it was handled. Bits got lost and in many cases any old bolts were used to put the aircraft together. A lot of the fairings on the He111 were held in place by tape!

When the Ju-88 arrived from storage is was also in a poor state, it took me and my boys the best part of a year to put it back into a reasonable condition for display, but by the time it was dismantled and re-assembled at Hendon it had been pretty bashed about again. I just about made me cry when I saw it after the move.

How long it was in a crate before leaving Farnborough was not recorded on the aircraft record card, it could have been quite a long time, or just weeks before the move. When I was trying to locate components for it in the 70’s, most of the internals, such as the instrument panel were at Cardington in the RAF museum store. It was in a pretty sorry state by the time it came to St Athan, all the moving between storage sites had done it no good at all. Anyway attached is a photo I took of it back in 1974.

Hi Jim

From Memory
1464C – Aero Engines
1464F – Marine Craft
1464G – Aircraft Ground Support Equipment

Many of the 1464 series were amoungst the many essential reading requirements if you were ever to get through the old (Pre 1970’s) RAF engineering promotion exams! The problem you will find is that there was a major change in RAF technical examination procedures in the early 70’s and the 1464 series which were already obsolete as engineering documents, were only retained for training purposes. The change rendered them completely obsolete, so they were withdrawn from the technical libraries and scrapped on mass. About the only place I could think, might have a copy would be the RAF Museum storage facility. They might for a fee allow it to be copied.

Keith

Hi Lion Rock, As I said I’m not an avionics expert, perhaps your right, the rad alt may have a limited altitude function. The problem with the Barometric type is that if you have set it at the normal pressure of 1013.2 mb and you are approaching an airfield to land, the altimeter tells you your altitude above sea level, not your actual height above the ground. A Rad Alt will. So perhaps the usefullness of the Rad Alt is limited to that sort of situation, take off landing and low level flight, therefore no need to have a huge range of operation.
I am also at a loss as to how a jetstream would change a Rad Alt reading, I’d like to know how bouncing a radio signal off the surface of the terrain underneath you is affected by entering a jetstream. I’m also a little baffled by the rise in temperature. According to Bernoulli’s theorem of streamlined flow the temperature should fall with a rise in flow velocity, which I thought would be the case in a jetstream – any phyisicists our there to explain this?

P.S. I’m intrugued by your “Lion Rock” tag – is there a Hong Kong connection?

I’m not an avionics specialist but the difference between a barometric altimeter and a radar Altimeter is the fact that a barometric one shows actual altitude above sea level whereas a radar altimeter shows the height above whatever your flying. So if you were over a 10,000 ft mountain at a barometric altitude of 25,000 ft, your rad alt would read 15,000 ft!! So I think rad alts do work above 25,000 ft. Confusing or what!

Quite where these two terms originated is something of a mystery, but I suspect the dreaded hand of our beloved CAA!

I lecture in Aircraft Engineering for a well known aviation training organisation, and I can assure you that this terminology has been around for quite some time, we teach it, it’s in our notes and has been for a long time. We also have questions (possibly the same ones) in our gas tubine examination bank.

As it’s also in the National Certificate Examinations I would suggest that it should also be in their notes or included in the study material that they refer to.

Hi Simon, I was groundcrew on the dear old Vulcan when they were all white. I can’t remember any of the stencilling on the aircraft being in pink. All the markings including the standard NATO markings for Fuel,oil,hydraulics etc were light blue.

Keithmac

Hi Scouse, You are of course correct, the CL-44 was Tyne powered, my brain must have been in neutral!