I have enjoyed this forum, but a Moggy says above, and with the recent Bader Enigma story, the forum as dropped to a level where it is not enjoyable. Voice your opinion, and remember it is just that ‘your opinion’ and not everyone will agree. This is no reason to slag each other off.
Let’s get back to the real subject AIRCRAFT, new/old, Cessna/warbird, who cares as long as it flies.
Keith Hill Blenheim, commissioned for my Dad in 1987
My Dad in uniform
My Yak 52
Keith Woodcock ‘preperation’ ‘trepidation’ ‘relaxation’
Keith Woodcock ‘scramble’ ‘combat’ ‘return’
that BF Clark spitfire
SP Jones ‘clean sweep’
And my favourite ‘the magic of flight’ Coulson
Willitfly
They are not my comments, as I said lifted from pprune, comments of Genghis the Engineer. It was offered as advice, not as a negative “don’t build”. Maybe these are not easy builds and why there is not many flying.
I for one would like to see more, and with further information may consider a build. But if all my time is taken building no time left for flying, which of course is what I would rather be doing.
Dazdaman, from the pprune forum.
Isaacs designed two replicas, the Spitfire and the Fury; I understand that the man-hours and manufacturing techniques are pretty similar between the two.
I met a gent once who had just finished building an Isaacs Fury, which he’d started just after he’d retired. I asked how many hours it took, he said about 3,500.
What profession had he retired from? – he had spent his entire life as a carpenter.
You have been warned!!!
I agree MC, good program.
Lottery money should be used to allow all these heros a last chance to fly before its too late.
There is nothing stopping you wearing a parachute if you wish.
I would suggest a parachute worn on your back, more comfortable on journeys, and you dont waddle like a duck walking in one (unlike one you sit on).
Wooden inserts in the well, then sit on a piece of foam.
I use the wooden insert even with the chute as I am a short arse.
I do wear a parachute, while I do not find them uncomfortable, I tend only to wear one during aero’s. The military wear a chute on every flight. So unless you are doing aeros or think you will have a structural failure…..
Like MC, whats special about a Varga Kachina, except its something different from a 152 ?
http://www.planeplace.com/varga/varga001.htm
Our Yak is on the British register, and we were given exemption from displaying the G reg. Until 1998 when the CAA changed their minds. This was due to the CAA being unable to verify our colour scheme was not an accurate reflection of a DOSAAF Yak.
Despite letters from Russian Authorities we had to yeild and display the G reg, spoiling the a/c looks.
GC doesnt Tom own a T67M, G-SKYC?
And Im sure he will tell you how good it is.
I have a Yak 52, great aircraft, will do all manoeuvres in aresti catalogue 2 up with full fuel. Becoming more expensive to run now on the G register, what out for the airframe MPD currently issued by the CAA.
Just bought a Firefly, only flown a couple of times, its no Yak, but much cheaper to run and still +6/-3 G. It is also well equipped for cross country flying. Despite 160hp and VP prop its still a delight to fly.
Out of interest, I have just read from ‘spreading my wings’ by Diana Barnato Walker.
“The Blenheim was a nice twin to fly, but its single-engine safety speed (115-120mph) was above its final approach of 90mph, which meant that if one engine packed up on finals, and you were under safety speed ( which you had to be if you were flying it according to the maker’s specifications), then you simply went in – bang!
Of course, if you were coming in on a ‘Barnato Bomb Approach’, which was Derek’s name for my pulling both engines right back, then gliding in from a great height in this way with no power needed on finals, you wouldn’t drop a wing and stall in, if an engine suddenly stopped on you.
Derek, [ Wing Commander Derek Walker DFC, and Diana’s future husband] who was a very experienced pilot , naturally disapproved of my ‘BBA’, even though I explained that I couldn’t be caught out on finals as I was above single-engine safety speed, so didn’t need any engine power to drag me in.”
Hamtech
The MPD’s for Yak aircraft are listed here http://www.yakuk.com/mpd.htm
The only one not listed is the 1998-017 R3 MPD regarding
airframe life limitations and overhaul life, this is probably
because the work needed to be carried out has not been
agreed with the CAA yet.
The CAA are to issue yet another MPD regarding the air bottles, requiring they are checked with an internal inspection and hydrostatic test.
What with the airframe MPD (still not resolved) the CAA are giving us Yak 52 flyers are hard time at the moment.
Still a great plane to fly, and as Yakrider says, lots of character. I love it more than the missus, at least thats what she says!
Yakrider
Hopefully this thread will spur others to note things down. It’s sometimes frightening how fast time flies!
I agree, I wish I had recorded my Dad’s stories from the war, and now it is too late. I have his medals, photographs and medals, and proud of them.
He never wanted to talk about his experiences during the war, maybe because he felt that because he wasn’t aircrew his contribution was negligible, although the ratio of groundcrew to aircrew must have been something like 20:1.
The ground crews do have good stories, and their contribution was extremely important, what good is aircrew without a plane?
Get those pens and recorders out, and record history while you can, I wish I had.