Fluttering and dancing with the (nuclear) breeze? 😉
Fluttering and dancing with the (nuclear) breeze? 😉
Well if I remember correctly, there were plenty of scenarios which would have triggered an exchange. One involved an assault by the Warsaw Pact forces which, with Nato losing, would trigger battlefield nukes. USSR responds with medium range weapons widening the battlefield and taking out most of Europe. USA and USSR look at what they’ve done and stop. Not much good for us but that was one of the scenarios used to justify the UK having its own independent Nuclear weapons.
I think the difference between then and now is that there “might” be a possible threat of a dirty bomb in a European capital, a Middle East exchange or Pakistan/India’s dispute getting very hot but which of those would lead to Mutually Assured Destruction?
You say “it could be anywhere” but it is very unlikely to be everywhere.
Allan
Well if I remember correctly, there were plenty of scenarios which would have triggered an exchange. One involved an assault by the Warsaw Pact forces which, with Nato losing, would trigger battlefield nukes. USSR responds with medium range weapons widening the battlefield and taking out most of Europe. USA and USSR look at what they’ve done and stop. Not much good for us but that was one of the scenarios used to justify the UK having its own independent Nuclear weapons.
I think the difference between then and now is that there “might” be a possible threat of a dirty bomb in a European capital, a Middle East exchange or Pakistan/India’s dispute getting very hot but which of those would lead to Mutually Assured Destruction?
You say “it could be anywhere” but it is very unlikely to be everywhere.
Allan
Gosh – they’ve set up the ability to make a brand new Rotary engine. That’s quite some project. Does anybody know how long it took them to achieve that?
The Rotary engines are fascinating – how long did they last? When did the Radial start to replace them?
Allan
I heard about that Cumbrian quarry years ago – nothing specific just a rumour that there were a number of aircraft pushed in there. I didn’t even have the location. Other info from that source turned out to be unreliable so I dismissed it. Strange that it turns out to be true. What else has come out of there?
And, since it is traditional with this type of thread, what about the dozen or so Albemarle’s that went to Russia? Anything left of them other than rumours and speculation?
Allan
Mmmm – four Pobjoy engines and basic wooden construction. Shouldn’t be too challenging for the right person (except finding four airworthy Pobjoys)
Far more historically relevant than other scale replicas, since it would be a recreation of a trials aircraft. But is it just me that finds a scaled down replica leaves them cold?
Allan.
Apart from the Stirling Project, nobody is ever willing to undertake such a project. With talking a project doesn’t start, it needs blood sweat tears and a lot of money!
And it is great credit to the project that they are prepared to give it a go.
Cees, just to go back to your original question about the Egyptian Stirlings and what is possible to go and look for them. I did speak to a friend yesterday who knows about fund raising and it is not straightforward to raise money in the UK from eg Heritage Lottery Fund if that money is then spent in Eygpt. What would be needed is to design a project to, for example, research potential survivors with the majority of the research work being in the UK – and then tack on a trip to Egypt to investigate the site on the ground as a small part of the overall project. That might get money.
It strikes me that what the Stirling Project needs is more time (people with time) and money. But there are ways that, even from a distance, we can support it.
Allan
I think you need to look at those parts the RAFM hold as what they are – relics – if you ‘restore’ them, there will be nothing left of the original part, apart from an odd bracket or fishplate here or there.
The original Stirling relics, are exactly that “original”, and given their rarity, should not be consumed to create reverse engineering drawings, if the cost is at the loss of those relics.
Hear, hear. Any large Stirling parts are very special, as are the few surviving documents.
Ok then, what’s the use of storing these parts indefinately without doing anything to preserve or restore them.
And that’s the most important point. The challenge is to bring the information in these surviving pieces to one place for a recreation.
I had the good fortune of being able to visit Wyton recently to see the Stirling Project and was very impressed with the quality of their work. As they progress with the cockpit, I’m sure that high quality work is what will unlock doors for them.
The biggest challenge comes with parts in private collections which are much harder to negotiate access to.
Allan
Mhuxt – that’s the one. Wasn’t working too well last night but the bit you want is pages 660 and 661 of the Operations Record Book.
The text is a bit feint and fuzzy but (subject to me having transcribed it correctly) it lists the crew of C – ML748 as
F/O K N Davenport
F/O A N Crompton
F/O T J N Mitchell
F/O W G Done
Sgt J Naylor
Sgt N Taylor
W/O H N Morgan
W/O H L Webster
F/Sgt R J Brown
F/Sgt F G Hyland
S/Ldr R D J Baird
F/Sgt W G Dann
Sgt Naylor’s service number is 573499. He did deserve his Goldfish badge.
The mistake with the aircraft serial number is not that uncommon. I’ve seen errors in crew log books (confirmed by comparing with the rest of the crew) and even occasionally in the ORB and aircraft movement cards. Most likely explanation is often poor handwriting at some stage in the transciption.
Allan
I’d concur with that – I think Richard has it. 🙂
I can’t get to the ORB at the moment but if I can tomorrow then I’ll look up the crew list for you and see if Sgt Naylor was on ML748.
Cheers
Allan
The RAF Museum have wreckage from LK488.
See: http://navigator.rafmuseum.org/results.do?view=detail&db=object&pageSize=1&id=20285
They also have a few other parts listed on that website, including the undercarriage.
Interesting question. I suspect the liklihood is that many of these aircraft (especially a Spitfire or Hurricane) will end up representing the breed’s wartime heritage – which in a sense is what they are doing right now on the display circuit.
You raise a valid point that many aircraft’s airshow history is also important. But what of the other airshow types? Your point is surely as valid for say the Rothman’s Aerobatic Team’s Pitts.
I saw a Pitts Special at the Science Museum recently – it certainly felt right in there. It had earned its place, as do many other airshow performers.
Allan
What – are the Olympics being held in Egypt? :confused:
Welcome Crabfat. Might be worth a quick search for previous threads on the Stirling here, then at least you will be able to keep up with all the in-jokes.
The Stirling is the most obvious gap in our aviation heritage, but since the Halifax gap has been plugged rather sucessfully, there is hope. Extremely difficult is not impossible.
What surprises me are the distinct lack of Short aircraft prior to WWII. The world’s first aircraft company, first twin engined aircraft, the Navy’s first aircraft and developed our first transatlantic airliners. Yet, apart from a partial Short 184 and a handful of 1930’s Scions, there is nothing left of that heritage. So yes, I’ll support anybody who wants to do anything to recreate any Short Brothers aircraft.
Allan
Rather perversely for a cat owner, I like to feed the birds in the garden. Then one day a Sparrow Hawk landed in the apple tree. I hadn’t been feeding them – just fattening them. Nature is so cruel.
Still, where would that Sparrow Hawk have been without me.
Gave the cat a hell of a fright too 😀