Well well! Many thanks for the info. Most intriguing.
Some strange attitudes on here: this has nothing to do with rich people and Cessnas, or even decreasing GA use. We have lost much of the aircraft manufacturing base which not so long ago rendered hundreds of very successful civil and military aircraft. Look not-so-far away and you’ll find Spain, France and Germany (to name just three), with thriving production lines and at least a semblance of an aircraft industry.
And please don’t bother to tell me about Airbus’ SA/LR/LA/XW & A400M wing build in UK. OK it’s better than nothing, but we don’t complete an aircraft bigger than what – a Typhoon? – these days.
Further to that, it’s about the fact that more and more of our cities are not even served by a local airfield, much less an airport. Cities that is, not towns. Let’s start with Oxford and Swindon (yes, Swindon is a city now).
My travels in Europe continue to demonstrate that it doesn’t have to be this way, and there are plenty of thriving local airports, feeding into the hubs and doing very well for it.
But all the while we tolerate the destruction of useful assets (Filton’s runway is a good example of that – and in a better place in terms of motorway links and weather than Lulsgate), nothing will change. There are plenty of useful brownfield sites that can be used for affordable housing before we get to digging up the first airfield.
Woodford, Filton, Panshanger, Manston – and now Kemble?
There are many more. When will someone step in and end the madness?
TDY (from memory) is less than 90 days. But that applies to units, not aircraft singly.
I didn’t realise there was a book dedicated to reading IARCs, but it does make sense. My list came from a handwritten set of notes many years ago from Dave McLaren.
It’s good to see fellow IARC readers on here though – I was beginning to despair of the “Where on Wikipedia can I find…?” type of question, often rendering a, “I found this on Baugher’s list” type of reply. I had imagined a world where the term ‘historian’ meant one who was able to Google adeptly.
Mind you, I know of a number of books which have reached publication by using just this process.
Possible, but I’d assume a Depot Maint code (or similar) if it was transferred to a non-resident unit (Working Party etc), rather than another ‘RT’.
But yes – Air Britain often comes up trumps in these situations.
Bushy Park. HQ only and not a flying field for ARS aircraft except possibly H-19s.
ARS = Air Rescue Service/Squadron. 9th ARS flights became squadrons circa 1953 and for example, the 9th ARS flight at Manston became 66th ARS. 9th ARS was concurrently upgraded to Group status.
Just to clarify:
60th TCW, Rhine Main
Assg AMC 04Mar53
Lost 60th TCW/Gain AMC Kelly 05May53
En Route 05May53
Transient Maint 1631st ABSqn Prestwick 08May53
Transient Maint 7559th MGp B’Wood 06Jan54
‘A’ auth salvage as result of flying accident (but most likely date for accident was 08May53), 20Jul54
AFE reinstated/AMC cancelled 29Sep54
No assignment other than 60th TCW and AMC Kelly (but never arrived) shown. Transient maints ‘RT’ are not assignments – otherwise we’d have some very strange fighter assignments in the ’50s, when brief RT’s are shown many times all over the place, often at civilian airfields!
I’d surmise an incident at Prestwick (engine fire/heavy landing etc) and subsequent recovery to B’Wood for assessment/repair.
Since both locations show ‘RT’ codes, it’s not correct to state either base as an assignment.
I doubt that the incident is recorded, but still worth looking for a mishap report for 8th May 1953. This looks to be the date it arrived at Prestwick.
It does sound like the aircraft was being returned to the US from the 60th TCW: Burtonwood or Prestwick would be typical transient stops en route, so I think your guess that it was an accident at Prestwick looks sound.
Any chance you could post the last couple of cards?
Inverted Beaufort?
OK – looks like a flying accident ‘A’ at B’Wood (RT/transient) on 20th July 54. Thus, it looks like (possibly) an accident on transfer from another unit, and it again looks like it wasn’t a 7559th aircraft, merely taken on charge for disposal.
What does the previous line say? Most likely it will show another unit with an ‘LB’ (or similar) loss code.
9th ARS HQ at Bushey Park: B Flight had C-82s.
Graham,
Can you transcribe the line which shows the ‘A’ or ‘J’ loss? It should say ‘auth recl’ or similar.
I dare say it doesn’t help much, but 9th ARS at Manston operated C-82s 44-23029 and 48-568. The former was transferred to 66th ARS at Manston and retired in August 1953, probably to Burtonwood.
There were a good few still around in the mid-50s, but pinning this accident down might be a bit difficult – especially since these Maint Gps are usually less well-recorded than the front-line Groups.
As ever, I’d go through the aircraft record cards as a start. It’s a long process, but very rewarding. I’ve had a quick look and I don’t have record cards for anything pre-49FY though.
Or my major annoyance: using the word ‘aerodynamic’ to describe something that should be described as, ‘aerodynamically efficient’.
Thus, Concorde’s shape is described as ‘aerodynamic’. Well anything that’s moving is ‘aerodynamic’ for goodness sake!
Or ‘wind resistance’ instead of ‘air resistance’.
All of the above betray a basic lack of trade training!