MondarizOk, in keeping with the above wish regarding allied projects, I bring you the Gloster E.28/39.
Not the most fortunate aircraft when it comes to sleek aerodynamics and
quite a far cry from the advanced German designs.
German designers had the ability to make auxiliary fins look sexy. On the Gloster E.28/39
they just look like a late design feature to correct an earlier design flaw (which ofcause they were).
MondarizI have a piece Focke Wulf Condor spar which i got from the museum at Bletchley Park when the aircraft section closed down. This came from a crash site on Mount Brandon 1940. Also have a Pre Luftwaffe instrument fuel rate dial from a world war 1 Fokker D VII. Plus luftwaffe steel helmet.
The Condor, what a rare and exotic relic.
You might wanna do a slight corrosion inspection, there seem to be traces around the rivets 😀
Mondarizwell, it looks like a nice project to take on. Many cockpit items required but also many still there. The seller is taking a walk with reality however. By the way, the fighter pilot helmets included… Chinese motorcycle helmets!
Man, wouldn’t you look like a right plunker, driving a bike with one of them….
MondarizAs JDK said ,this type of thread is a little pointless (except perhaps for a little fun;) )
Perhaps another factor you could include would be accident rate.
The corsair was real beast and i love to see(hear) them fly but they had a very high accident rate especially with inexperienced pilots.Two of its nicknames were bent wing ba5tard and Ensign Eliminator !!
Ensign being the lowest officer rank in the USN.
The Fleet Air Arm had the corsair in service a couple of years before the USN because the US would not operate it until some of its problems were sorted,whereas we were desperate for good carrier fighters and i doubt that the corsair accident rate was any worse than the seafire.cheers baz
Sure its all for the fun of it.
Accident rate would be a very good catagory.
Corsair losses in the World War II were as follows:
* By combat: 189
* By enemy anti-aircraft artillery: 349
* Accidents during combat missions: 230
* Accidents during non-combat flights: 692
* Destroyed aboard ships or on the ground: 164.
If I remember right (fat chance), the Corsair problems were about US carrier operations specifications. The Corsair flew the majority of its WWII missions from land (again from memory).
MondarizMondariz, you just got to look past the crap, ignore the pics, models and (possibly) flimsey business plan, at the centre of this auction is a sound Voodoo cockpit.
J Boyle has a point though, in S.Wales there is no longer any airshows, apart from a small RAF recruitment afair on Swansea seafront. They have a Jaguar cockpit open for kids, and some of their parents, they were queing both days of the weekend to sit in it. If the RAF charged for this (thank god they didn’t) they would have made a bit of money that weekend.
Im surprised about the Coventry Voodoo cockpit, that must be very deriable amongst the UK collectors.
Maybe its exactly because they didn’t charge anything, that there was a queue all day. RDAF have sort of the same thing going, with a small F-104 replica.
People also stopped buying those “Airport arrivel” type charter holiday pictures, for more or less the same reason. Most people have their own camera (although they might not have a Voodoo cockpit 😀 ).
Sure there are always people willing to pay for such a shot, and its also slightly cool, but dragging that thing across the country as a business – come on!
However, i do like the cockpit and my bet is thats how it will sell (if sold it is) – to a cockpit collector.
Enough slagging, I can actually see the idea work, for someone who is going to all the airshows anyway, would pay the ticket and quite a few beers. Or as a fund raising for a some restoration project, but it has to be done for the fun of it, not really as a business.
MondarizThough not considered part of the Battle, would it not be possible that some of the currently flying Tiger Moths may have been in use as station hacks and consequently had a few narrow escapes and brushes with the enemy.
Without carrying out a detailled trawl through the net, the same criteria might apply to the Dragon Rapides that are about.
I’ve looked up the history of the TFC Gladiator, and while, apparently not being hurled into the fray, it was no doubt on standby and serving with a squadron at the time, unlike the Shuttleworth example that was in store during the Battle, though no doubt if things had got desperate, it would have got pulled out and used.
I forgot to look up the TFC CR-42, but the example at Hendon was involved, along with their Defiant, but yes, they ain’t going to fly again, so discounted.
There must be several a/c in the Shuttleworth collection, that, while not having been willing participants, may have had a few interesting moments.I’ve checked on the TFC Falco, it’s from Sweden, however it was delivered during the period of the Battle, could it not have been from squadron service in France, or were they all specific new builds.
Personally i see BoB as the defence of britain (or the attempt to gain air superiority by the Germans). Taking part in the defence/attack, would be any aircraft that had combat missions in the timeperiod/area.
General military flying (training and logistics) are in my eyes not combat (even if there might have been combat around them). Although they might have been equally important to the eventual outcome.
However, if as you suggest, one of the aircraft happened to become involved in the fighting, they are surely veterans too. I’m just pretty sure, that any Dragon rapide that accidentally became involved, is no longer with us.
The Germans might have non-combat aircraft too, but i wouldn’t consider them veterans either.
MondarizMaybe the closest we can get, is listing the four aircraft under a number of headings.
Kill ratio: could give a figure for the effectiveness against enemy aircraft. Although airwar later in the war, was less fighter vs fighter than earlier. Nevertheless the job was to shoot down aircraft and they should be judged by that.
Rate of climb: I think AC performance can be compared here (as opposed to speed, which would involve comparing speed at various altitudes. Climbrate has its uses for a fighter aircraft.
Service life: The time an aircraft was used in its designed role (not moved to ground attack, or other roles, but used as a fighter), could give an indication of how the military considered its effectiveness.
These are just suggestions and hopefully people will post others, but unless we have a common ground to consider each aircraft, its pretty hard to pick a winner :p
Please post what you would consider a factor for deciding and we will make the list and add the numbers. Then we can always discuss the relevance of each entry.
MondarizThere is also a third edition published in 2002
see here
http://www.transportdiversions.com/publicationshow.asp?pubid=3579
Aha! So they have kept it up. Good I will buy that.
Thanks for the info.
MondarizThere was a person who took a nice Phantom cockpit (cut down) and mounted on a trailer to airshows. He had fllightsuits and small helmets for kids to wear while their pictures were taken.
The cockpit was painted as Thunderbirds on one side & Blue Angels on the other..
I’ve also seen it done to a T-33.Overall, harmless stuff for kids….I’m sure it’s not meant for plane/airshow anoraks.:D
Might get kids interested in aviation….for us jaded folks, we should remember that sitting in the seat of a jet or warbird would be a pretty big thing to most kids. Safety regs make it fairly unlikely that they’ll get a chance to sit in an operational jet…or even a museum example.
Who knows, you might even make a pound or two with a old Gnat cockpit painted up as the Red Arrows.
Sure there is a slight marked for novelty photography at airshows, thats not what makes this add so funny.
Its the whole sales pitch.
How it includes small rather odd extras (almost like the BUY NOW and get all this).
A hardwood F-101 model “Brand new and in perfect condition“.
A photograph (unframed, but “suitable for framing“).
“A replica pilot’s squadron patch is included.”
“A copy of the 1962 soundtrack “Sound Effects of the U.S. Air Force Firepower””
This next item has my full attention, as its authentic, original and real!
“An authentic (original and real) pilot’s checklist flight manual is included”
Last time i used Ebay, i got one of those damn fantasy checklists, not a real one :rolleyes:
“Wherever you go you always find people of all ages that love airplanes and would pay to actually get a once in a lifetime chance to sit in a real Fighter Jet Cockpit.”
Keeping in mind that this novelty is for kids, then assuming that it will be their only chance (in their lifetime) is maybe assuming too much.
Besides all that, if there was a sound business in the above, we would have plenty at every airshow (like any other consession stand).
MondarizThanks for all your suggestions 😀
I have picked Cosford as my main visit (besides Flying Legends) and have a few as number two (if i’m allowed another, or for the home trip).
I have found this website usefull to check the individual museum:
http://www.britishaircraft.co.uk/museum.php
But unfortunatly its listed after counties, and i have no clue where most of the are. A a “point and click” map would have been easier.
MondarizPersonally, I love when people quote top speeds…….. That is not to say the F4U-4 isn’t faster overall than the Mustang. (i.e. P-51D) Yet, that is not always the case! For example the USN compared a P-51B Mustang vs a F4U-1 and F4U-1A Corsair in 1943. What did it discover? Well, the P-51B was indeed faster @ 32,000 ft. (i.e. What a surprise!) Yet, above that they were close and below that the edge clearly went to the Corsairs! As a matter of fact the Corsairs were faster than the venerable Mustang at over 80% of the altitudes! So, in 1943-45 at what altitudes did most aircombat happen at? Above 30,000 feet or below? Yet, some how the Mustang is always “faster”? Really, what should be stated is the Mustang is overall faster at “one” given altitude. Not faster throughout the flight envelope. Regardless, my point here is not to knock down the Mustang nor to raise up the Corsair. The point is the overall performance of each at all altitudes and all speeds!
If, you still don’t get my point? The F-15C has a top speed of Mach 2.5 and the Raptor Mach 2.0+. So, which of the two types is faster? Funny, on how many people simply forget aircombat happen in three dimensions………:rolleyes:
Are you asking if I get your point, or was it a more general question?
If you read my poste (the one you quoted) then you will find, that we are saying the same thing (more or less).
I’m not suggesting you can claim a winner, by reading figures from a “Fighter performance sheet” in a book – far from it.
There are too many parameters involved, to judge which was actually the best service aircraft. You would need a group of pilots, who all fought in each of the four aircraft, but even then you would have a hard time finding a winner.
I picked the P-51D – because I like the Mustang.
MondarizI’m pretty sure this is what is going to clinch the sale:
“A real photo (not a print) of an F-101 inflight suitable for framing. (12″ x 8″)”
An actual photo (although as yet unframed)!
Never mind a rare cockpit and a dodgy businessplan.
MondarizI have ‘Air transport hulks’, by Nigel Tomkins. Airline Publications, november 1979. Bought it at Foyles in London for 4,95 pounds. It was one of the first attempts of charting the WFU and derelict aircraft worldwide in one book. Lots of data such as registrations, construction numbers and a lot of photos of exotic locations. Like a bunch of Caravelles stored at Tunis, or the Carvair (HI-172) “converted into a restaurant” in Santo Domingo. As far as I know this was never followed up. But now, we have the internet……….
Tillerman.
That must have been some book
1979: Morotai and other exotic places still overflowing with WWII aircraft.
Does it have any pacific aircraft mentioned?
MondarizDoes anyone know whether the FHC 109 has actually flown??? It certainly hadn’t before it left the UK, if not then technically it must still be under restoration surely.
Thats the finer details.
Airworthy vs flying.
Hopefully someone is in the know.
Another thing is the Bf109 mentioned as the Indian. If its the aircraft that (at least the indians think so) went missing, is there any confirmation on BoB action?
I read it had landed in the UK in 1939, but i also remember seeing 1940 somewhere. Anyone know more?
MondarizThis link says otherwise…. 😉
Yes, lets move it up the list 😀
Airworthy:
Peter Vacher’s Hurricane R4118.
BBMF’s Spitfire P7350.
Ed Russell’s Bf109E CF-EML (cn 3579).
Flying Heritage Collection’s Bf109E-3.
Under restoration:
Possibly an Me 109 E being rebuild (Indian one?).
Unknown:
P3351 may and may not have seen BoB action.
Sign In
