dark light

stuart gowans

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,861 through 1,875 (of 1,986 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Jet undercarriage… #1283820
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Possibly the longer U/C was to make servicing the A/C easier i.e removal of gun packs ,attachment of missiles, fuel aux fuel tanks; many military Jets were designed with the Navy in mind as well as Airforce , they have longer travel oleos for obvious reasons. I read somewhere (doesn’t everybody) that the Vampire suffered from ground effect with the aux fuel tanks fitted, and the U/c needed to be retracted almost imediately to stop the vortices (?) adversly affecting the handling.

    stuart gowans
    Participant

    JDK, if you typed with one finger and had to look up as many words as me ,you’d be in the low hundreds as well! Re sand inconsistancies I would have thought the type of sand with sharp protrusions jutting out would be about the worst (mountains I think they’re called)

    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Pete, re stearman, I would have thought that it was possible to injure yourself more than KST just climbing into one!! there wasn’t even a speck of blood ,and she had a white dress on! I think the Pheonix was built to look flimsy but did have an FAA certificate; I certainly wouldn’t want to be in the front cockpit of one (stearman) when it was put down like that! (I half expected the pilot to spring out of the rear cockpit shouting woof! woof!, Treat your womam like yer kite etc etc. Good to hear your son’s ok Re mis diagnosis,if you want a second opinion don’t ask another doctor, and no we don’t “do” medical dramas I don’t need reminding how fragile life is , or her constant criticism ,of something I have no specialist knowledge in -actually thats almost everything really!!

    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Although, you can tear any film to bits if you want,after all compare the crash of the Pheonix, it was the person sitting nearest to the engine (in both cases a radial) that died , the engine apparently crushing him , but in the EP she only gets a broken ankle/wrist and a few ribs, add that to the fact that the second biplane (tigermoth?) lands and takes off in similiar desert conditions as in the Pheonix, with no injestion of sand issues, and no skis. People on this forum are obviously in another league to me when it comes to acceptable authenticity in films; my wife is a specialist burns nurse ,she tears to shreds anything medical on tv re authenticity, its a good job she was asleep during the English Patient!.

    stuart gowans
    Participant

    JDK, you might be repeating yourself ,but those of us that haven’t got as far as 4855 posts, probably haven’t covered this (and many other subjects); there seems to be a school of thought here that if you weren’t registered and active on this forum by a certain date ,that you cannot discuss anything previously “done to death” and must content yourselves with reading other peoples thoughts on a subject, near to your own heart. (thanks for the link)

    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Presumably thats why you don’t see it land, just the survivors climbing up a rocky path; almost the greatest film ever made,(see signature ) I look forward to watching the remake when its either sent through the post free of charge (randomly, just to get rid of existing stocks) or else it appears on tv when I’m too inebriated to find the remote and turn it off.

    in reply to: Spitfire survivor? #1288657
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Nick, if you think that the lever is from the wing area, might it be a gun c*cking lever , and the wear on the end, from that operation, or else an U/C indicator, that protruded through the top of the wing. only guesses I’m afraid.

    in reply to: Is Hendon Museum fully open #1288768
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    I wonder whether the “atmospheric” lighting is hiding the true state of the decor, looking at the outside , that certainly needs a coat of paint. I have been in the Grahame White hangar , and frankly was a little disappointed at the time, its only now I realise how priviledged I was! What is annoying is their “foot fault” rule ,which they seem to enforce with enthusiasm, and the nasty piece of aluminium channel ,that isn’t fixed down ,that alerts the guards (sorry staff) to the fact that you have tried to get just a couple of inches closer, because you are interested in aeroplanes and you want to see a bit more ,that because of the light levels you can’t, and stay on the carpet.

    in reply to: Heads up tonight, Pearl Harbor BBC1 8:00 #1290197
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    I’d say the bit where the Arizona leaps out of the water like a wounded croc is my least favorite; I know every action has an equal and opposite reaction an’ all, but I would have thought blowing all to £”$* would have been enough opposite reaction. Yes I too marvelled at the amount of stick movement a chap can make without affecting the A/C at all ,initially I thought it might be a hand pump for the U/C!
    “Just get me into a godamn plane”

    in reply to: Heads up tonight, Pearl Harbor BBC1 8:00 #1290350
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Looking at the sequence with the “planes on the lawn” ,I can see a similarity with the chateau sequence in BoB , is it possible that the producers of PH thought that all British control towers were modeled on stately homes ?

    in reply to: eBay Alert – RAF Tangmere Sign #1290909
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    If you read my post again you will see that it is the engine that has changed hands ;The engine was “traded” for a DB601 and the prop hub and blade were in the same container in High halden, I understand that one of your group was the “owner” of the engine at this time. The owner of the property (who we both know) said that the vendor of the hub and blade (you) was after £1800- for the hub and blade. Now if that is incorrect then I too will apoogise, however this is not a rumour or a myth it is “first hand”. Trading items with someone who is going to “move them on” (be it in another trade or else for cash) is the same as selling them as far as I am concerned; especially if items that were received (as trades) for the original ones are then sold. I got a PM from xtangomike (whoever they are) last week explaining the world of Tangmere to me; as I said in my reply they should post their comments on this thread so that a balance might be achieved. I have no issue with ownership ,and as you know I have purchased several items from you without cause for concern. Digging things out of the ground is another matter altogether ,and I feel strongly that something should be given back, (especially if said items are sold ) you have done your bit and I applauded you for that

    in reply to: eBay Alert – RAF Tangmere Sign #1291100
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    I am pleased to hear that the afore mentioned gentlemen have funded this plaque, I know that from a Fairy Battle dig (possibly this one) last year the engine and prop hub and a blade (complete with bullet hole) were recovered. I know what the engine made ,and the asking price for the prop hub and blade, and I think this is a fitting tribute to pay. I would like to see all future (and some past) “digs” approached in this way . If the history of the A/C and its crew were unknown ,the value of recoverd items (both historical as well as financial) would be very much reduced. I myself am happy to buy crash recovered items (although only usable ones) ,and have sold a few as well (unusable); market value dictates what an item is worth, and provenance increases that value, but money is being made “hand over fist” in some cases, and its good to see something given back.

    in reply to: Heads up tonight, Pearl Harbor BBC1 8:00 #1291317
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Alright ,so I’m “ploughing a lonely furrow” with this one, as I said it should be viewed as a film not an oportunity to remake a classic or an educational treatise ; the cgi is all I expect from that “art form” its only realistic when cut from shot to shot quickly ,which is fine for building excitement but not so good when A/C move around like a wasp with a sore ar$e ! Far worse I think would be to take real people that experienced the raid first hand ,and put them in a dyslexic ex pat love triangle having fought in all the major theatres of the war, There is a stark warning here for the Dambusters remake, almost certainly Guy Gibson isn’t exciting enough a person to suit modern film making, its dark throughout the raid (so you can’t see anything) and the backing will almost certainly come from the US ,and most of them haven’t even heard of the BoB let alone the dams raid ;so I ‘m sure that the Canadians will become Americans, if not Gibson himself. “lets go do some business”

    in reply to: Heads up tonight, Pearl Harbor BBC1 8:00 #1292282
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Well…. I’ll be watching it, I read a quote (on another thread) ,from Richard Todd about the inaccuracies in “The longest day , he said that he approached the role in the film as just that, a “film” ;besides my son likes it (although not as much as BoB), if I had the option of seeing this “warts and all” or big brother , pop idol , X factor ,or the myriad of cr@p “reality” put your brain in neutral and veg out shows , normally on offer, it wins hands down; up against a “proper war film” its not so hot.
    “I need more ammo ladies”

    in reply to: Will it be at Legends???? #1294331
    stuart gowans
    Participant

    Thank heavens for that ,I would hate to think that any of my posts could be misconstrued as an endorsement of multiculturalism; soya dumplings anyone?

Viewing 15 posts - 1,861 through 1,875 (of 1,986 total)