dark light

Bradburger

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 1,381 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Question for Lancaster experts #769829
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Mark,

    Not that it is probably much help, but this is what the paragraph on the carb heat control says in A.P.2062 A & C Vol. I – Lancaster MK.I & III (dated April 1943), under the Engine Controls section of CONTROLS AND EQUIPMENT FOR PILOT.

    (See attachment)

    Looking at the CoG and Loading charts, there is no mention of modification 1198 in the Modifications weight list.

    (The highest mod listed. is no.913 ‘Introduction of downward vision blister’, approved in August 1943).

    So it’s safe to assume it was introduced after this time period.

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: Early Spitfire Mk I detail question #789776
    Bradburger
    Participant

    I meant to say, you’ll find some great detailed pictures of the Duxford based MK.Is from the forum’s resident DX photographers ‘Pen Pusher’, ‘DCW’ (David Whitworth), and ‘Duxman’, linked in the Duxford yearly threads.

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: Early Spitfire Mk I detail question #789797
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Pete,

    No problem – glad they were of use!

    As Rocketeer points out, the team restoring it got as much info as they could from various sources in this no expense spared project.

    As you can see, the results were worth it!

    (Btw, Roobarb who posts regularly on this forum might be able to steer you in the right direction, being an employee at ARC).

    Oh, I just remembered, there was a thread on here a while back on the subject which might be of use: –

    https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?133624-Spitfire-MkI-unknown-device

    Cheers

    Paul

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]257755[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Early Spitfire Mk I detail question #789833
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Pete,

    I took a few external close up pictures of the hydraulic tank on P9374 a couple of years ago at DX that might be of use: –

    https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipNCsr4WRepeXoXR6m3QBns6Fh41nuImVzeGLU8AhpAqLsGpdI7T5JMacq3ffKxmMQ?key=WENCcU9fQUVHOUhaRmktVkJScGhEVG5SNW53c2ln

    There are some schematic drawings for the hand pump hydraulic system in the MK.I A.P., but as I recall, no pictures of the actual tank/mounting/plumbing.

    Maybe ARC/HFL could be of assistance in obtaining the information you need!

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: SPOTTED (2017),What Have You Seen? #799147
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Heard but didn’t see a Spitfire at low level this afternoon just after 15:30.

    Not sure which direction it was going but possibly the Boultbee two seater, has it has been quite active the last few days.

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: Charles Masefield and P-51D N6356T #804039
    Bradburger
    Participant

    It was Aeroplane.

    I don’t have it to hand at the moment, and cannot recall which month it was.

    Oh, just discovered it’s in a pile of mags nearby – August 2017 issue.

    (The cover has Hurricanes R4118 & P3717 on it).

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: What does a Griffon 67 power? #804672
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Thanks to Mark12 for the full detail on the use of the Griffon 67 in the Spitfire.

    And as Daz posted a picture of SM845 and the MK.XVIII gets a mention, I note it is possibly on to pastures new.

    (It’s been showing as ‘Pending’ on the Platinum Fighters website for the last couple of weeks).

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: What does a Griffon 67 power? #805226
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Some variants of the MK.XVIII, usually the FR.XVIII.

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: How Low Can You Go (2017) #811155
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Ray Hanna and MH434, Fairoaks, 1971.

    😀

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: Spitfire IX MK356 new desert scheme #811267
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Looking great in the new scheme.

    I was lucky enough to see her at Biggin during a hangar tour in September, minus engine.

    I note that the latest edition of Pilot has a picture of her taken during her first flight after the major overhaul.

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2017) #817703
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Any news on P51b/c Berlin Express? Is she still at Duxford?

    She was still there on the 22nd of this month, along with Frenesi.

    https://www.facebook.com/The.Fighter.Collection

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: General Discussion #225225
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Meanwhile, Blair’s EU spokesperson, Alastair ‘you people’ Campbell, is out and about showing his sinister side again: –

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: General Discussion #225227
    Bradburger
    Participant

    That MP is probably cognisant of the fact that you can’t rely on the educational establishment to present both sides of the argument. That’s why they are where they are. That is why they are teachers/lecturers in the first place; to establish their own politicised opinion of the matter under discussion.

    Indeed, just like the ‘impartial’ Professor Michael Dougan, who’s ‘balanced view’ of Brexit caused a stir due, to of course, its ‘factual’ content: –

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-european-law-professor-says-brexit-campaigners-dishonesty-on-an-industrial-scale-like-a7095486.html

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: Attn: Roobarb #818529
    Bradburger
    Participant

    As Roobarb mentioned in the Duxford thread about PT462 and the use of the short span ailerons, it would seem that Dick Melton favored incorporating modifications that he felt improved, and were best for the Spitfires he was restoring, based on his experiences with them.

    (Again, as Roobarb said, and attempt to try and get the very best out of a restored airframe it would seem, from both a build standard and the flying qualities).

    Looking at the various CAA Airworthiness Approval Notes (AAN) for the Charles Church Spitfires, he seemed would include modifications that went beyond that particular Mark being restored, so a MKIX for instance would have modifications that were incorporated up to the PR.XIX, or later.

    Here is an excerpt from the original AAN for MK.IX PL344/G-IXCC: –

    Restoration is LF Marque IX standard using modern materials and incorporating numerous
    modifications not previously associated with this marque of aircraft, but incorporated in subsequent
    production marques as improvement modifications. All original radio, armament, oxygen, camera
    and electrical equipment has been deleted rendering modifications related to this equipment not applicable.

    Below is a another section of the AAN which lists the types of modifications incorporated into the rebuild of PL344: –

    Mr Melton has raised modification Spitfire DM 043 to define the build standard of Spitfire GIXCC,
    to list its equipment and provide a record of the modifications incorporated at restoration.

    Each of the listed modifications have been evaluated for its effect on the airworthiness of the
    aeroplane.

    Modifications have been introduced in five categories as follows:-

    a) To introduce essential modifications and inspections as promulgated by MoD and the RAF
    in AP 1565A and E Vol II Part 1, AP 1565 J & L Vol II Part 1 and AP 1565 W Vol II and
    various STI’s. (Schedule I and II of DM 043).

    b) To selectively introduce modifications published in AP 1565 W Vol 2 Part 1 Leaflet Z26
    for later marques F14 to F24. (Schedule III of DM 043).

    c) To incorporate modifications published by the Battle of Britain Flight. (Schedule VII of
    DM 043).

    d) To introduce product improvement modifications generated by Mr R E Melton. (Schedule
    VI of DM 043).

    e) The following Dick Melton Aviation Mods have been introduced DM
    032/034/035/038/039/040/041/042/043.

    In many cases original Supermarine drawings have been used, but a full set has not necessarily
    been available and drawings have been introduced by Mr Melton as required.

    I’m sure Roobarb will be able to give more info especially regarding PT462 (and PL344!), but as you can see, Dick Melton not only incorporated later modifications from later marks he deemed appropriate or necessary, but also his own which he felt were improvements (a modern and simplified electrical system with an alternator for example).

    For those interested, here is the link to the original AAN for PL344 (Issue 2): –

    http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/AANDocs/22416/22416000000.pdf

    And here is the AAN for it when it was rebuilt and certain mods removed by ARC for Tom Blair: –

    http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/AANDocs/29241/29241000000.pdf

    And the AAN for the wing gun bay fuel tank installation: –

    http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/AANDocs/29241/29241000100.pdf

    Cheers

    Paul

    in reply to: General Discussion #225869
    Bradburger
    Participant

    Meanwhile, Alistair Campbell proves he’s no democrat, and the reason he’s so much in favour of the EU (that is, power, but without accountability), and tries to justify it with the ‘it’s bad for the economy’ and ‘it will ruin the younger generations future’ arguments: –

    Cheers

    Paul

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 1,381 total)