It doesn’t apppear to contain any “electronic” components, and looks to be a large switch box.
PM sent.
My apologies to all those who sent me a message regarding items for sale; not exactly an April fools, but more a “I cant find a smiley that expresses jaded cynicism moment”
some of us have been flagged for advertising in the past or at least
sailing very close to the line on the rules I think perhaps we need again to have some clarification from a mod as to what constitutes blatant selling or commercial advertising as laid down in the forum rules so we dont see any falling out over perhaps new forumites making a utter B****er of things and getting barred for not reading the lengthy rules or misunderstanding them ??mike E
http://www.aircraftrestorationgroup.org
http://www.whirlwindfighterproject.org
I’m happy to sell direct to anyone here, or through my aerojumble, (I’ve just started) just email me for prices……..
Ok, didn’t realise it had been here before; “mad” was tongue in cheek as I do know Pete! (all the same I’d like to hear his thoughts, on the moment the pallet started to “rotate”)
Didn’t the Wright Bros patent essentially cover all means of controlling an A/C, which lead to the dispute with Curtis?
Isn’t the PPL rating for a twin A/C because direction can be controlled by the engines?
the Royal AEROnautical Society has just begun to use the American word “airplane” instead of “aeroplane,”
Is it only me that see’s an irony here?
It may be reasonable to presume that with the bombing of the Woolston factory, that it was not just the prototype that was destroyed, but the drawings as well; certainly none seem to exist, and that would have put paid to the development.
Supermarine didn’t have the capacity to build the bomber in anycase,and probably never realised the longevity of the Spitfire, and that design work would still be going on to the wars end; it’s well known that Vickers (chief) designer Wallis didn’t get on too well with Mitchell (or vice versa) and that wouldn’t have helped with the adoption of the project by Vickers.
Whether it was for hangarage or just because the AM wanted the wing span that width, surely the issue is why would it have been nearly 100mph faster than the Lanc, (retractable turrets notwithstanding) and has nobody noticed that the tail changes from a twin fin, to a single between the two drawings?
Wasn’t that an AM specification at the time to utilise existing hangars?
The bomber had retractable turrets, so unlikely that they would have been “off the shelf items” in any case anything Supermarine would have been their own complicated design; because they could!
Crankshaft started off at 900lbs and has a finished weight of 28lbs; thats a lot of machining!
Am I losing it, or are the wings clipped in the first photo and complete in the rest?
Impressive project – looks great!
No you aren’t losing it; they were originally clipped to help finish it off quickly, now the wing tips have been built, it wears them as was intended.
Apparently he’s building another one………..
Relax Mike, it was only tongue in cheek! in any case there are plenty of @rse holes within the industry, if you excluded them as well, we’d only need a conference call!
Sounds good, now all we need is a site dedicated to historic A/C, and a way of keeping all those who know absolutely nothing about the subject… out.
WELDING SOME ANCHOR POINTS ON!!! 😮
Last week I couldn’t spell engineer…….
This week, Ir1?