IIRC the collection had a very chequered history. Certainly it was open in ’67 when I visited. I think it ran into various difficulties (including with Southend Council ?),closed was rebadged and reopened. It then finally fell apart in a very untidy manner in the early 80’s. The demise of Lincoln APRJ from Napier Icing Research was very sad. It was a familiar sight and sound over Luton in the mid to late 50’s, even getting to Farnborough for the ’61 show ( which caused a bit of smile even then.)
“Scrapwith Camel” ?
I’ll get my coat…..
Well I’ve seen the film a few times and I think it’s pretty good, a bit slushy, but Peter Finch is cool as usual, and good for the time, the Japanese aren’t entirely dealt with as the b###### we are led to believe.The Radio Times only gave it 3 stars, question, why are Oz civil aircraft coded VH and not A?
Wasn’t it something to do historically with Vagabonds Haven?
Ref #13. It is a common experience that those who were “there” or have “in depth” knowledge of an event are usually pretty mortified at the version of events packaged by authors or producers for public consumption. So called TV “documentaries” for example- or even news reports.
JDK Have you worked in publishing?
I will not answer that question on the grounds that it may incriminate me. π
(However, I’ve answered off-line JDK)
Check out the date that Ken Ellis signed the July Flypast sticky.
π
And him an ex-schoolteacher as well IIRC !!!!:)
I agree with Melvyn Hiscock. There are fewer and fewer historical aviation authors now who actually hail for a relevant aeronautical background, whether it be the aircraft industry, military or civil aviation.
Thus a collection of photos, outline drawings and often imaginative artistic graphics cobbled together with second-hand information from others of the same ilk, company PR departments and suchlike, is now passed off as “authoritative”, despite the lack of practical experience or relevant credentials of the perpetrators.
My initial comments were aimed at the mass production line of material coming out of our of so-called specialist magazines where the editorial staff used, at one stage,to have a fair understanding of their subject matter. Providing articles for such publications is a common start point for authors and should surely provide a catalyst for them to learn the basics of responsible writing. Some accountability for accuracy, style and content used to be accepted by editorial staff in this context.This no longer appears to be the case, with even adherence to the basic rules of the english language often being ignored.
I ask anybody who has had specific first hand knowledge about any subject to consider what their reaction was when considering the accuracy of publications or media productions from outside “experts” on their home topic.
Just a little comment, did any of these Spanish Buchons see any action anywhere or were their guns never fired in anger, I was thinking possibly revolution in Spanish colonies, my knowledge on Spanish colonialism is non existant, any answers?
They were operational in the Spanish Sahara (alongside Casa 211s amongst others) in the late 50’s to early 60’s in the Ifni war. This has been well reported now and I’m sure one of our Spanish correspondents can fill in with greater detail.
P.S. Incidentally to correct a hoary old error in translation that is oft repeated, ” BuchΓ³n ” does not actually mean “Pigeon” in Spanish (try “Paloma”). A very loose and somewhat inaccurate translation might be “Pigeon-chested”. According to one who flew it in service , it is actually derived from the noun “Buche” for a birds crop which when full would give that shape bulging shape like the lower merlin cowling.
(Reaches for gin bottle and falls off chair).
Michelf – I visited Concord at Yeovilton circa 1978 at the tender age of eight. If I had known then that it wasn’t actually a purpose built display building but a hangar pretending I would have protested most vigorously and suggested a trip to the seeside instead! Thanks for ruining twenty eight years when I enjoyed the knowledge that I had seen her safe and sound on display when infact she was in a building which now seems to be a charleton !
It was purpose built by a major civilian contractor after the arrival of the aircraft. A hangar is a building of course. I don’t think those working on 002 at the time were too worried about the semantics.
Ref Concorde 002:
The work started on Concorde 002 the day it arrived at Yeovilton and there was tremendous pressure to get the aircraft into public viewing condition internally ASAP after it was to be placed in the proposed hangar (then known as the Concorde Display Hangar).Thus an enormous amount was already done on the airframe over an extended period ,before it went under cover, by a largely volunteer team, (002 Sqn RIP ) with only the leader on the full time strength of the FAA Museum. The aircraft was the property of the Science Museum under the management of Margaret Weston and its placement at Yeovilton provided them with a much needed out station as well as being an additional attraction to the FAA Museum.
No, get them out now. Same goes for the Norwegian and UK hill side wrecks
We are working on the underwater wrecks here in Holland πPreservation is not only for this and the next generation but for the generations after that. Or we are being too egoistic?
Cees
In my considered opinion not egotistic. Realistic.
I remember seeing one (possibly two) stored at Booker in the late 1960s. I think one went to an ex BOAC pilot in Laleham, Middx. (Ronnie somebody???) I could have sworn that one ended up with Cole Palen at Old Rhinebeck but its not listed on their website.
I’m pretty sure one was in an unrigged state at Booker in early 1970 (about the time that the first ,ex Egyptian, Yak -11 in U.K. was being restored there to flying condition and had a split flap jack by memory.)
Thanks Guys,
Its seems sad that the key part of the design exercise was the bit that seems to have been ditched. One wonders if there has been any consideration of the possibility of getting the building of a reproduction wing under way, once the fuselage is back in N.I. ?
Thanks Dezz, It’s looking lot better than when I last saw it. I was told the wing had been “lost” around the time of the Skyfame collection’s break up and the move out of Staverton. As I recall the fuselage was on separate display then (c.1967) but I seem to remember the wing being nearby in the hangar.
Global Flyer of course was a single seater and had to move pretty quickly to get round the earth before the pilot conked out through fatigue. In addition the aircraft had to be flyable solo for what was still an extended period . Consideration of these aspects alone would have driven the concept away from that of Voyager for example. The jet configuration arrived at of course pushes the optimum operating altitude way up and then one starts approaching all the Mach/IAS/TAS “compressibility corner” constraints ( N.B. The B-47 as an early example). Very high aspect ratio wings ,apart from presenting many structural problems regarding issues such as aeroelasticity,also involve an increased pilot work load ( e.g. handling an extremeA/B ratio) – undesirable on long missions , especially in the descent and landing phases,witness the U-2.
So the logical statement from chorned.etc. is probably correct for an optimum L/D solution aerodynamically. I would consider that the final design compromise for Global Flyer would however , in addition to engineering constraints, have of necessity included a high consideration for the Human Factors aspects of the overall project ,thus pushing the final aircraft design well away from an aerodynamic ideal.
Wrong side of the atlantic Ithink, also other side of the channel π