Hi Nils,
Your brass item, 6D/527 is known as a Socket, Mk. IV. It would probably have been on the end of a length of rubber tubing, connected at the other end to a Mk. I or II oxygen economiser. The crew member would plug his mask into the oxygen system by means of a matching Plug, Type IV, Stores Reference 6D/526. The mask would be Type E or later.
As for the crucial aircraft type, I think I’ll pass because I can see elements of numbering from both the Stirling and the Halifax….I’m sure an expert will be along soon to sort that one out.
Regards!
682al
It’s red to the top, but I thought the blue band in the middle represents the shortfall in cash terms? And it’s not moved in months which either means no-one is donating money or they just don’t update their pages that often.
Or have I missed the point of your post – sorry?
Another vote for the Classic Car scene. I recall seeing ads in the monthlies which should give you contacts worth pursuing.
Regards!
p.s. Elliott, I’ve lost my email account but I’ll be in touch when I find it again!
Apologies, should have added “expect to see it in widespread use in heavy bombers, from 1944 onwards”
14A/3208, Type 35 Control, No. 20. 24v version, operated by bomb release. Range 2 – 20,000ft. Night use, with F24 camera.
Regards!
682al
The debate is certainly going round in circles and, forgive me, but it’s starting to look a bit like the crowd waiting for the execution.
I’ll post a message if I hear anything locally about the planning application, but other than that, I’ll take no further part.
Thank you David Burke for a laudible response which appears to sum up the attitude of the British Aircraft Preservation Council nicely.
British Aviation Preservation Council
Director: Mr. Nick Forder
Address: Museum of Science & Industry
Liverpool Road
Castlefield
Mail code: Manchester M3 4FP
Country: United Kingdom
E-mail: [email]n.forder@msim.org.uk[/email]
Phone: +44 (0)161 6060121
Fax: +44 (0)161 6060186
The BAPC, formed in 1967, is the national body for the preservation of aviation related items. It is a voluntary staffed body which undertakes a representation, co-ordination and enabling role. BAPC membership includes national, local authority, independent and service museums, private collections, voluntary groups and other organisations involved in the advancement of aviation preservation in Britain. A number of overseas aircraft preservation organisations have affiliated membership.
Membership:
Officers of Council : 16
Member Organisations : 139
Affiliated Overseas Members : 12
Affiliated Organisations : 2 (Transport Trust, Association of British Transport Museums)
Affiliated Non-Organisation Members : 6
The activities of the BAPC include:
1. Quarterly Council Meetings hosted by member organisations
2. BAPC Logbook
3. Organising a Parts Finder (Wants and Disposals) system
4. Maintaining The BAPC Register of Historic Aircraft
5. Producing The National Aviation Heritage Strategy
6. Organising Stopping the Rot conferences and seminars
7. Providing information about specialist help.
Taken verbatim from it’s website.
Any BAPC officials on the forum who may wish to comment on it’s role in this situation…?
I’m sure that the various Vulcan orientated groups, be it from Woodford, Southend, Wellesbourne, Bruntingthorpe wherever, are following developments as closely as we are. I hope they will be able to liaise with him to ensure that anything remotely useful can be removed from the airframe before the inevitable dismembering starts.
They can also no doubt offer lots of advice on safely detaching the nose section, if he still wishes to go ahead with the idea.
682AL- is this potentially the most exciting thing to ever happen in Dukinfield?
Well in terms of the Flypast Historic Aviation Forum, I guess it is. Unless you want the “Merlin engines disposed of down a redundant pit shaft when the scrapyard was cleared in 1969” story. But that belongs on another thread.
Seriously, it’s yet another odd twist in the tale, don’t you think? Hoax objections to his planning app. Hmmm, wonder who’s behind it all?
Dark doings in Dukinfield?
Just a small update, from th’Advertiser, Tameside’s free weekly paper.
It seems that two objections submitted to the Planning Department have been proven to be false.
One was in the name of a neighbour who died some years ago, and the other was in the name of a friend of t’landlord!
Decision still pending as of tonight, though….
It’s not the subject matter that’s important, but rather that a moderator intervened in a thread that had turned ugly.
I applaud the decision and look forward to prompt action in similar situations.
if no ones interested
4,804 views so far…and no-one’s interested???
I hope this thread isn’t turning sour on us?
Consul – I think the reason you’ve not received a response to your previous message is because you seem to be indicating that you are unable to post your photos until “later in the year”. I guess we are all resigned to waiting until an opportunity presents itself to you. I look forward to viewing them in due course!
Steve Bond – You seem fed up because your photos have not produced the response you had hoped for. Neither do some of the ones that I post, but it doesn’t stop me from posting them – and I would not discourage others from posting theirs, either. This thread has one of the highest hit counts of any on the Board – that’s surely a sign that our efforts are appreciated, even if they don’t provoke many direct comments?
And Dave T – I’m not sure I understand who your sarcasm is aimed at? Are you wanting confirmation that there are still parts in the yard in Frome or are you disappointed that no-one snapped them up when they were available?
^^^What he said!^^^