dark light

Creaking Door

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 12,419 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Identify the bits in the barn #1157695
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    One of the engines looks like a Hercules…

    Not the one bottom-right in the first photo…..it seems to have cut-outs for valves in the piston tops! šŸ˜‰

    in reply to: Trying to ID these 1930's RAF Aircraft/Airfields #1156831
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    RAF06.JPG Definitely at RAF North Luffenham. TB had security authorisation to examine British and allied aircraft. Is anyone able to suggest the aircraft with its bubble open? Inscription on photo reads ‘North Luffenham G1165 HGCU 04.10.44’

    Must be an Armstrong Whitworth Albemarle.

    ‘HGCU’ possibly Heavy Glider Conversion Unit?

    in reply to: Trying to ID these 1930's RAF Aircraft/Airfields #1156843
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    RAF07.JPG This one is a mystery all round!

    (Badly burnt) Bristol Blenheim Mk I

    in reply to: Trying to ID these 1930's RAF Aircraft/Airfields #1156712
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    In the open hatch picture some AW Whitleys are sitting in the far distance.

    The aircraft with its hatch open is definitely an Armstrong Whitworth Albemarle and the presence of Whitleys would seem to fit the usage of North Luffenham perfectly at that time.

    http://www.raf.mod.uk/bombercommand/s76.html

    ā€œWhen [North Luffenham] re-opened in March 1944, the station was used by No. 21 Heavy Glider Conversion Unit with Whitleys and Horsas. This HGCU began to receive Albemarles to replace the Whitleys shortly before moving out in September that year.ā€

    in reply to: Trying to ID these 1930's RAF Aircraft/Airfields #1155655
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    RAF13.JPG and RAF14.JPG Are these all the same type of aircraft – Armstrong Whitworth Albemarle of HGCU?

    Yes, both these are AW Albemarles.

    Creaking Door
    Participant

    Not sure about the statistics, but I’m glad you posted your findings.

    ā€˜Findings’ makes it sound very grand! In reality it was ten minutes spent with some digital calipers, a calculator and a twenty-nine year old copy of ā€˜Aircraft of World War 2’ by Bill Gunston, which I didn’t have the heart to take to the charity shop…..again! Anyway it seems my figures weren’t too far out.

    This article is fairly good at explaining a few thoughts and views on the 109

    http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/articles/109myths/

    A large amount of very interesting reading there!

    Interestingly there are several mentions of ā€˜narrow undercarriage’ and when it is mentioned by the likes of Gunther Rall and Eric Brown I guess people tend to take notice. I suppose what they meant was that it felt narrow as opposed to it actually being narrow but at least the author confirms my calculations in the “The specific problem with the Bf 109 was the very narrow undercarriage trackā€ paragraph.

    Thanks everybody for the replies and links, I should have realised that the landing / take-off problems with the Bf109 couldn’t just be put down to a ā€˜narrow undercarriage’ and are far more complex but I suppose the myth has grown as a sort of shorthand even though the undercarriage is actually wider that that of the Spitfire!

    Creaking Door
    Participant

    And I suppose the Bf109 undercarriage was narrow if it wasn’t being compared to the Spitfire. šŸ™‚

    in reply to: Avro Vulcan XL319 Restoration Project #1154995
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    Somebody should phone the local TV news channel! They would probably send a camera-crew…

    …you can’t buy publicity like that! šŸ˜€

    in reply to: U-boats sunk by RAF #1152977
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    Does anyone know if there is a list of u-boats sunk by Coastal command which would include details on the aircraft and crew involved?

    As suggested the book by Norman Franks is the excellent ā€˜Search, Find and Kill’ which list every U-boat sunk by aircraft under RAF command together with aircraft, squadron and crew details.

    I have a copy if there is any particular incident that you are interested in.

    in reply to: RAF Wartime Aircrew Training Aircraft #1147079
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    …it strikes me that a lot of the engine failures may have been handled better by more experienced crews.

    Interesting figures.

    Possibly, many of these engine failures may not have been ‘engine failures’ at all, things like carburettor icing were surely more of a problem during the winter months. It would be interesting to compare ā€˜engine-failures’ during three months of summer.

    Also it has to be said that the engines of an aircraft are in a class-of-their-own when it comes to complexity compared to other flight-critical parts of the aircraft.

    in reply to: Empty Your Pockets Before Going On Patrol #1147089
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    Likewise what data did the British gain from papers (I presume) carried by shot-down Luftwaffe crews?

    According to Dr R V Jones in his book ’Most Secret War’ some co-ordinates found in the notebook of a Luftwaffe ā€˜Bordfunker’ (1) were partially responsible for revealing the operating principal of one the German radio blind-bombing systems; a system that was successfully countered by the British.

    (1) Always liked that title better than Wireless-Operator! šŸ˜€

    in reply to: RAF Wartime Aircrew Training Aircraft #1146960
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    …I spoke to many ex aircrew and all of them referred to the condition of many of the training aircraft they used, all were of the same opinion…

    I think it was a universal opinion of aircrew (especially tour-expired) returning to an OTU that the aircraft were ā€˜tired’ and the aircraft would also have been of a earlier mark, or an earlier design, to the ā€˜factory-fresh’ front-line aircraft they were used to.

    Irrespective of any other factor, older, more used, lower powered aircraft will have an overall lower serviceability that newer aircraft; it doesn’t necessarily mean that they have been poorly maintained but that is a possibility too.

    in reply to: RAF Wartime Aircrew Training Aircraft #1147015
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    I think I saw carburettor icing mentioned but no more than two or three times…

    ā€˜Engine-failure’ is an interesting cover-all phrase and I’ve no doubt that, as you suggest, engine-mishandling by the crew was responsible for a fair proportion of these ā€˜failures’. I don’t suppose the crew had much chance (or inclination) to try to analyse the failure if their aircraft started to lose height, in bad weather, over a blacked-out Britain.

    An engine loses power, the RPM starts to drop, it overheats or the oil-pressure drops, obviously it is ā€˜engine failure’, nothing to be done so bale-out or crash-land. Interestingly all the aircraft that you posted figures for are single or twin-engined, and I’ve read that the Whitley couldn’t maintain height on one engine.

    Also these statistics are probably made up from what the pilots or other survivors reported; people who may not have known what the problem was or who had an interest in not being found responsible. šŸ˜‰

    in reply to: 1940 Combat Reports #1147032
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    Fascinating thread.

    PS – we never lost a Ruski Bomber!!

    When flying escort? The instinct to protect being greater than the instinct to ‘kill’?

    in reply to: RAF Wartime Aircrew Training Aircraft #1146822
    Creaking Door
    Participant

    Amongst those I’ve put down to engine failure are several instances of runaway propellers and more of engine fires. There’s a lot to consider.

    Agreed. I know from reading about the carrier HMS Vindex that several Swordfish (and their crews) were lost due to ā€˜engine-failure’ in Arctic conditions…

    …the eventual cause was traced to fuel contaminated with water (condensation in the ship’s bunkers caused by low temperature plus an ineffective method of dealing with that problem) but these would undoubtedly have been classed as engine-failures had the pattern not been spotted by the flightdeck-crew.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 12,419 total)