Tiger Moth? Errrr…
I do however think it’s a nice Dorchester ACV command car seat, so still WW2, but armoured vehicle rather than aircraft.
I suppose the scanned document at Dropbox at
https://www.dropbox.com/s/l6crfjlsutwqqtw/271299.pdf?dl=0
says it all.
Hard to believe the first few pages came from a serious attorney/legal professional. A lot of prejudicial and biased statements in there and a few typos too. On that basis alone I’d bet on it being thrown out. Let’s hope so. Not sure about the other businesses, but I’d think that Yanks will suffer some backlash.
1st April.
Not very funny though – more likely to nurture animosity than a laugh surely? PoF also firmly state that it’s not.
More accurately (at least according to PoF) the lawsuit was brought by, “Yanks Air Museum, Flying Tigers Aviation, SOCAL MRO, and Zangeneh Aeronautics”. The website is short of detail, other than saying it’s because of the impact on local businesses.
Does anyone have any impartial detail on the reasons?
Got them all, but the Republic Lancer pic is actually a converted T-6 look-a-like.
Have you tried the RAF Museum? They hold a great many plans from sites to individual buildings and have been a great deal of help to me in the past.
I’d suggest a look at The National Archives: usually a good starting point. The following is filtered for WW2 and after, but there are more documents detailing pre-WW2:
ADM 1/26788 Naval aircraft: colours and markings. 1953-1962
AIR 14/1179 Identification markings of bomber aircraft for paratroop carrying: modifications. 1941 May-1944 Sept
AIR 14/1180 Identification markings of bomber aircraft for paratroop carrying: modifications. 1941 May-1944 Sept
AIR 15/22 Identification of aircraft markings and characteristics of aircraft. 1939 Sept. 1940 Aug.
AIR 15/23 Identification of aircraft markings and characteristics of aircraft. 1940 Aug. 1941 Dec.
AIR 15/285 Aircraft: Camouflage and Marking instructions. 1942 Jan. 1943 Nov.
AIR 15/873 Aircraft code markings, colouring and camouflage. 1950-1961
AIR 2/147 AIRCRAFT: GENERAL (incl. Aeroplanes, Seaplanes, Flying Boats) (CODE A, 5/1): Distinguishing marks and identification discs on Main planes of aircraft.
AIR 2/148 AIRCRAFT: GENERAL (incl. Aeroplanes, Seaplanes, Flying Boats) (CODE A, 5/1): Proposed change of markings for Service aircraft.
AIR 2/19046 Marking and colour schemes of RAF aircraft. 1975-1977
AIR 2/8385 AIRCRAFT: General (Code B, 5/1): External and internal markings. 1945-1952
AIR 51/105/578 Aircraft recognition and markings. 1943 May-1943 Sept
AIR 51/68/54 AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION: Camouflage and markings. 1943 Oct-1944 Nov
AIR 8/2301 Aircraft nomenclature and markings. 1960-1967
AVIA 13/616 Identification and other markings on aircraft. 1940-1947
AVIA 2/2370 AIRCRAFT: General Equipment (Code 6/9): Camouflage and recognition markings of civil aircraft. Policy and proposals. 1940-1945
AVIA 54/346 A.P. (Air Publication) Chapter 108: camouflage and aeroplane identification marks. 1947-1958
WO 204/4168 Identification: marking of aircraft : permits, passes and badges. 1942 Oct.-Dec.
WO 204/5333 Aircraft markings: operations memoranda. 1944 May – 1945 May
WO 219/893 Aircraft markings. 1944 Apr. – 1945 Jan.
WO 229/97/3 Distinctive marking of aircraft. 1944 Jan 01 – 1944 Dec 31
I may also be wrong, but I’m sure Bruce Robertson’s Harleyford books provide sources for markings data. AP.108 (AP Chapter 108?) above sounds like a good starting point.
An RTM-322 maybe? Different type of Merlin, but would meet the ‘blade’ description.
But if it’s a piston V-12 then I think you’re right that it will be a Meteor 9 times out of 10.
xxx
Northern group overhead Filton about 10.25 in the end: did a circuit and then off southwest.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]251943[/ATTACH]
Some big bits here,
F86 Sabre fuselage.
Sabre 6 at Brunty: I have a few bits if anyone buys it 🙂
I’ve seen a magazine article about Flockhart’s Mustang crash recently (give or take, last 2 years), which included photos. I cannot recall if it was in a motorsport or aviation mag however. Anyone?
Hi Jerry!
I don’t know about Sabrejet’s recent experience, and I have never actually been (currently spending quite a lot of cash on asking them to search on my behalf) but I am sure that the NA on-line catalogue is quietly changed all the time, as results do seem to appear or disappear from searches year-to-year.
I’d agree that some of the photos do seem to move about: some time ago I was looking at a squadron Operations Record Book and as I turned a page to reveal a loose photograph, one of the staff from the PRO (as it was then) walked up and quick as a flash removed it. He explained that loose photos should not be included in this type of material but I didn’t think to ask how I might locate it should I require it in future. I can only imagine that it was catalogued as an RAF Museum artefact instead.
On another occasion while researching an RAF Sabre accident I came across a number of very graphic photographs of the hapless pilot, which I know should not have been public domain. I alerted the staff and these were also removed.
So I guess it very much depends on circumstances because in the intervening years I’ve looked at a lot of these files, and in the case of ORB’s found a number of loose photos which TNA don’t now seem bothered about. Likewise the AVIA, BT etc accident files often contain photos of aircraft accidents which are not relevant to the actual file. With luck over the years the system will sort itself out, but I do have a strong feeling that even now, uncovering the full extent of TNA holdings on one subject requires a great deal of luck.
Sounds like they were trying to climb it rather than vandalise it: I know the effect is the same but maybe the intent was not so negative.
And yes I am trying to put a positive spin on it. I’m fortunate to have two sons who fully understand what others gave for their today, and so I think it’s important to be thankful that not all of our youth is so irreverent.
An update on the Bristol from NZ Civil Aircraft (beware: incorrect apostrophe usage): http://nzcivair.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/ardmore-bristol-freighter-gets-rnzaf.html
Many thanks: looking forward to seeing this. Shame about the apostrophes (or should it be “apostrophe’s”) but I’ll get over it I’m sure 🙂
Any news on the NF?