Page 30 – Key Publishing

Joglo

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 469 total)

← 1 2 3 … 29 30 31 32 →

Author

Posts
October 21, 2008 at 4:41 pm in reply to: The Burnelli saga. #1168207

Joglo
Participant

One of the reasons for blended wing designs not being pursued is that many airlines believe that passengers want to be able to see out of an airliner.

A point that has been raised many times, but I’ll counter it with a simple question, how many people spend their time looking out of the windows for long on any flight, long or short haul?
Once you’ve seen one cloud formation, they all look similar and night flights at altitude are best spent getting some Zs in, IMO.
I’m taking for granted that most readers will have flown on commercial flights at some time.

daveg4otu, That model was a dream machine and never built, as I’m sure you know.

Referring to your ‘cumbersome name’ idea, I have the feeling that Burnelli was never a name that captured anyone’s imagination and maybe that had something to do with the whole story, sad as it is.

October 21, 2008 at 4:18 pm in reply to: WW2 night formation flying #1168223

Joglo
Participant

I did mention, “Whenever possible.”

One Lanc Tail End Charlie I knew, told me that altitude wasn’t always a bonus, because ‘Gerry’ (as he called them) pilots were searching at higher altitude for stragglers, as he never fired his guns in anger during 2 completed tours, it’s possible his pilot was right?

The other TEC I knew, wasn’t so lucky and had to bail out over occupied territory, after having swivelled his turret twice, the second time to retrieve his originally forgotten parachute.

October 21, 2008 at 3:59 pm in reply to: What if ??? #1168239

Joglo
Participant

This must be a good one…… What if you had an endless supply of money and there were no flying restrictions, CAA to worry about etc etc… 😀
What historic aircraft would you have built from scratch and fly ? ?

Not really that good a one Avro, if the money supply was ‘endless,’ we could all build every aircraft that ever flew?;)

Does anyone else know that ‘if’ is the biggest word in the English language?:D

October 21, 2008 at 3:48 pm in reply to: WW2 night formation flying #1168295

Joglo
Participant

Moggy C wrote: Inbound route to target and departure routes would, of course, be different so that those completing their mission were not on a reciprocal to those still inbound.

Not forgetting the quadrantal rule that was probably in use even then, whenever possible?

October 21, 2008 at 10:02 am in reply to: WW2 night formation flying #1168606

Joglo
Participant

Seems like this guy may have flown bomber escort at some point:

Night flying wasn’t much different except for formation flying. The only thing about formation flying was finding the planes after taking off. On a black night all you could see were the running lights of the planes and you had to find your own division quickly or try to select your flight out of all the other planes in the air. Sometimes it was a crowded sky.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/stories/02/a4894202.shtml

October 21, 2008 at 9:40 am in reply to: Landing Gear Identification needed #1168635

Joglo
Participant

Brilliant film Wellington and a very interesting website!

Whilst watching it, I began thinking of the other man/woman hours that went into making all the parts that they assembled, even the fabric.

Not a good thing for me to be doing at this time of day.:eek:

NB: Bullet proof fuel tanks, something that Concorde could have done with having.

October 20, 2008 at 12:23 pm in reply to: Landing Gear Identification needed #1169881

Joglo
Participant

I know this is only a kit part of a scale model Wimpey, but the part does look similar.
Click on u/c legs pic to enlarge:
http://www.armorama.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Reviews&file=index&req=showcontent&id=1982

October 20, 2008 at 11:42 am in reply to: The Burnelli saga. #1169904

Joglo
Participant

Please accept my umble apple ogies for misquoting.:eek:

I agree that the X-48B looks more like a flying wing, but as the linked page header states, Blended Wing X-48B has flown, who am I to argue?

It’s sad to know that quite a few YB-49 prototypes were built, but no subsidised Burnellis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XB-49
I imagine the US tax payer footed the bill for all that waste.

Pagen, I understand your interest in British aviation, but wouldn’t have been nice to see airframes like this built in the UK and flying overhead?
Sadly, the commercial aero industry in the UK more or less died with Comet, apart from Concorde, a bit like its car industry.

It’s also understandable why public interest in this design has waned, too few people realise its potential and have been brainwashed to accept tubes with wings as their mode of aerial transport.

October 19, 2008 at 4:25 pm in reply to: Instrument panel bolts? #1170613

Joglo
Participant

😀 It won’t be flying in the near future then?

October 19, 2008 at 4:18 pm in reply to: Instrument panel bolts? #1170619

Joglo
Participant

Hi Matt, I hope you’ve got the rest of the Canberra to go with the instrument panel?

October 19, 2008 at 4:14 pm in reply to: Heinkel/Casa at Duxford #1170622

Joglo
Participant

Southend is a long way from the sea, but fairly close to the Thames Estuary and I can assure anyone who wonders, that the salt air permeates a vast area in that region.

How do I know?

I was born and bred there, for my sins, and everything I ever owned during the time that could, would go rusty very quickly!:(

I remember seeing the CASA-2 there during a return visit in 73 and later saw what was left of it at Nth Weald in 88, when Aces High were the owners.
I offered them my services as a mechanic for free at weekends, but they didn’t seem interested.
That same day, I watched them running up the B-25 camera ship and shot a couple of snaps of it.

My damn camera counter packed up, I ran out of film and only managed to get one external shot of the CASA cockpit.

The best part was burning my 76, 350 Vette round the perimeter.:diablo:

October 19, 2008 at 3:48 pm in reply to: General Discussion #315291

Joglo
Participant

I didn’t find out that I was good with my hands, apart from model plane (not plastic) making, until I was 23, but didn’t really get my hands dirty, apart from working on the car, until the age of 27.
Even then I didn’t realise my full potential, that began to happen from age 33 and I retired at 47 with enough to live a good life on until death us do part.

Few people seem to realise that fortunes can be made with dirty hands and it’s not that demanding.

October 19, 2008 at 3:48 pm in reply to: Find me a job #1897807

Joglo
Participant

I didn’t find out that I was good with my hands, apart from model plane (not plastic) making, until I was 23, but didn’t really get my hands dirty, apart from working on the car, until the age of 27.
Even then I didn’t realise my full potential, that began to happen from age 33 and I retired at 47 with enough to live a good life on until death us do part.

Few people seem to realise that fortunes can be made with dirty hands and it’s not that demanding.

October 18, 2008 at 6:36 pm in reply to: The Burnelli saga. #1171292

Joglo
Participant

Pagen, I’m happy to know that you’re interested, but the only thing British about it, was the one off built under licence at Southampton.

ESTOL = Extremely Short Take Off and Landing.

When I google, XB-48B on my PC, the first item shown on the list that refers to it is,
http://www.talkingproud.us/ScienceBlendedWing.html

Yours may give different results.

José

October 18, 2008 at 4:08 pm in reply to: The Burnelli saga. #1171442

Joglo
Participant

ESTOL, ESTOL, ESTOL is one major key to safety, because, as stated earlier, take off and landing is where most accidents occur, so falling from a great height becomes the lesser of the dangers involved.
The greater the speed needed for take off and landing, the greater the danger?

Not wishing to go off topic here, but 3 mechanics have been done for manslaughter re the Spanair crash, for negligence.

We cannot work on theory if doubt still exists as far as Burnelli’s design is concerned, it hasn’t been around recently for anyone to study the pros and cons.
What can be said about it, is that no one other than politicians has come up with one good reason why it wasn’t an idea that could have been taken forward and improved upon, as Burnelli himself tried to do.

It isn’t here and now and it’s highly unlikely that any of us will ever see an aircraft flying that could have been a part of the here and now for most of the lifetime of everyone living.

May I suggest that anyone who comments on this thread, without first having satisfied themselves that they have read enough on the subject and come to a reasoned conclusion, would be best advised not to bother.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 469 total)

← 1 2 3 … 29 30 31 32 →