dark light

Smith

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 1,284 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Is any Members' name acceptable? #1929017
    Smith
    Participant

    Honest !!!

    I really am a gnome and I really do live in a garden … along with my friends Bill and Ben …

    in reply to: HE-111 jet test-bed #1259922
    Smith
    Participant

    Wow, thanks for that. I wonder how the testing process went. For example, was the 111 flown with that engine in addition, or perhaps on that engine alone at cruise, etc. Anyone have a book or similar that comments on the test program? Thanks D

    in reply to: Lancaster Loss 17/18 January 1943 (Revived thread) #1267198
    Smith
    Participant

    And can anyone please confirm what the German time of 2303 would equate to back at Woodhall Spa?

    My head hurts … take a look at this thread on 12 O’clock High. If I properly comprehend what the chap (Rob vdN) in Post 5 is saying, the time was the same on that date. 2303 = 2303. cheers Don

    http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=7170&highlight=time+zone

    in reply to: Twin-engined Spitfire! #1269916
    Smith
    Participant

    If I may quote from the above: ‘On the floor above, it used to be the lofting room where wooden mock ups were made of prototypes and experimental types and high up in the rafters was what looked like a Spitfire fuselage with a rounded nose where the engine would normally be and an engine bulkhead each side of it on the wings, it was terribly dusty. When I asked about it I was told that it was originally for a twin engined Spitfire but the idea was abandoned.’

    Putting 2 and 2 together; is it possible/probable Peter Weston saw the Type 327 mock-up. Would that be likely? Location and timing etc.?

    in reply to: General Discussion #312152
    Smith
    Participant

    Isn’t the idea instant recognition rather than a puzzle? [/I]

    Yes/no/maybe. Idea is to gain recognition and top of mind. Sometimes a puzzle and/or talking point can do that. Here in NZ there was a famous Colgate ad, featured a deeply Aussie “sheila” talking about how some sort of gunk “gets een”. Absolulety rubbed pretty well everyone up the worng way. But by far the best recall of any ad on TV at the time and for many years after. “the Colgate ad! Oh man …”

    BEST solution of course is something very well received and very top of mind. Basically where peole end up saying “that’s so cool, I love that” (and can remember the product!).

    in reply to: 2012 Olympics logo #1930023
    Smith
    Participant

    Isn’t the idea instant recognition rather than a puzzle? [/I]

    Yes/no/maybe. Idea is to gain recognition and top of mind. Sometimes a puzzle and/or talking point can do that. Here in NZ there was a famous Colgate ad, featured a deeply Aussie “sheila” talking about how some sort of gunk “gets een”. Absolulety rubbed pretty well everyone up the worng way. But by far the best recall of any ad on TV at the time and for many years after. “the Colgate ad! Oh man …”

    BEST solution of course is something very well received and very top of mind. Basically where peole end up saying “that’s so cool, I love that” (and can remember the product!).

    in reply to: General Discussion #312172
    Smith
    Participant

    2012 UK

    Interesting … I too work in a design business and at first glance I saw UK (the U above the K) and then 2012 (the 20 above the 12). It’s a very clever piece of design. And probably meets the objectives of the brief. Which doesn’t necessarily mean people will like it at first glance.

    in reply to: 2012 Olympics logo #1930035
    Smith
    Participant

    2012 UK

    Interesting … I too work in a design business and at first glance I saw UK (the U above the K) and then 2012 (the 20 above the 12). It’s a very clever piece of design. And probably meets the objectives of the brief. Which doesn’t necessarily mean people will like it at first glance.

    in reply to: Avro Lancaster spark plugs How Many ? #1283540
    Smith
    Participant

    I was kinda vaguely aware the Hercules was an odd number of cylinders, but would have to have lucked in to get the right number. And as for Wikipedia, I fully support your point, but (so far) I’m finding it not too bad on simple factual stuff (I know, I know, someone will point out …) it’s the curly why’s and wherefore’s that are a magnet for the opinionated.

    So are we saying 2 plugs per cylinder for the Herc? 112 in total?

    cheers D

    in reply to: Avro Lancaster spark plugs How Many ? #1283664
    Smith
    Participant

    or 144 on the Mark II

    Wikipedia … the Bristol Hercules was a 14-cylinder two-row radial aircraft engine …
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Hercules

    zigackly … 2.57 spark plugs per cylinder … :rolleyes:

    in reply to: Ident for Lancaster lost at Le Harve Sept 44 #1283730
    Smith
    Participant

    Welcome

    Welcome buddyk, as Moggy says, here we care. Don

    in reply to: Identifying Bomber Command losses #1297155
    Smith
    Participant

    Crash Location

    Here is a summary of what I know regarding the loss of Lancaster EE147, PG-P of 619 squadron during the Peenemünde raid of 17/18 August 1943.

    My Uncle, F/sgt L F English RNZAF (rear gunner) and his fellow crew (F/O O’Leary RCAF pilot) lost their lives when their aircraft was shot down in the immediate vicinity of Peenemünde that night.

    As I’m sure many of you know, Martin Middlebrook wrote a well received book about this raid and in it he alleges that this aircraft was 29th down, about 30 kms south of the target near Anklam. Middlebrook is unable to identify what combat resulted in the loss of EE-147.

    My conjecture is that this is because he has the wrong location.

    We (family) have a copy of an MRES report that identifies another location for the crash. Casualty Enquiry No. G 61, 20 Sept 1945, states inter alia: “According to German documents now in our possession the aircraft crashed 2 kms. north of ZECHERIN and 200 metres from PEENEMÜNDE on the night of 17th/18th August, 1943.” BTW I don’t have copies or even references for those original German documents, they may be KE reports.
    http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showpo…63&postcount=9

    January 2010 . If you search Google Maps for “Zecherin Germany” you will in the first instance be taken to a Zecherin near Anklam. If you the proceed/click North approximately 20kms, to the general area of Peenemunde, and then zoom in, a second Zecherin will reveal itself once the zoom is sufficient. It is a few kilometres South of Peenemunde.

    So … one Zecherin is near Anklam (ie. where Middlebrook suggests) but in no way coincides with the very specific location given by the MRES. The other Zecherin however, is not far south of Peenemunde. Although “2km north of Zecherin” and “200 metres from Peenemunde” does not make sense if it refers to the town of Peenemunde, which is clearly more than 2km north of the more northerly Zecherin … if it meant 200m from the banks of the river, interpreting Peenemunde as “the mouth of the river Peene”, rather than the town, it makes a lot of sense.

    That would put the location of the crash SSW of Karlshagen, itself a little south of the (scientist’s) housing estate and the workers camp, both a handful of kilometres south of the rocket facilities, and very much part of the target area. This argues that EE-147 was shot down in the immediate vicinity of the target, either an interception by a night-fighter right over the target (and this did happen) or the aircraft may have been hit by flak over the target and then crashed not long after. Bear in mind the attack was low level, between 5000 and 8000 feet (not metres).

    When? Well we know that 619 squadron, a member of 5 Group, bombed in the last wave of the attack, in part utilising the time-and-distance bombing method. And Middlebrook says the third wave bombed between 00:43am to 00:55am “British Time” I understand “local” time was one hour later.

    I’ve have a download of Tony Woods’ ReichWest claims and there are 17 claims between 1:40am and 2:00am at or near Peenemunde (and more either side of that time-slot). Is there any practical way to weed through them all?

    One thing I am doing ~ I have been to the library this morning and borrowed Middlebrook’s book. He discusses the air battle over the target and includes some personal recollections of Luftwaffe pilots with comments like “the aircraft fell into the sea” and so on. This will rule some out.

    And of course, if we are able to narrow the timeslot for EE-147’s eta at the target, we could perhaps narrow the field. We have the take-off time (21:55 UK time) can we compare that with other aircraft over the target area. Bit of a long shot I know.

    in reply to: Identifying Bomber Command losses #1297167
    Smith
    Participant

    Take off 21:55 UK time

    Thanks Kev

    A person on 12 O’clock high put me onto the fact that Lost Bombers has a takeoff time for EE-147 “Airborne 2155 17Aug43 from Woodhall Spa”.

    And I have very good reason to believe that they were shot down more-or-less over the target (not as Martin Middlebrook’s book alleges, some 30 kms away). I will post that argument in a moment.

    There are a large number of claims over the target around the time of the third wave (local time was one hour on, so we’re talking around 1:45-2:00am or 12:45 to 1:00 UK time). In this interval alone there’s around 20 luftwaffe claims at Peenemunde!

    If we could narrow the probable ETA over the target, we can narrow the range of claims. It wasn’t a difficult night to navigate so if we can reference other aircraft and their times, whether it be out of Woodhall Spa or elsewhere, maybe we could figure it out? I don’t know.

    Many thanks, cheers Don

    in reply to: Identifying Bomber Command losses #1298287
    Smith
    Participant

    17/18 August 1943 ~ Peenemunde

    BUMP ~ sorry to intrude again folks, but I wonder if we can solve the puzzle for the third of our likely lads?

    Maybe KEV with that wonderful “Bomber Command losses for 1943 by Chorley” or someone else, can we get some accurate timing around Lancaster EE-147, PG-P of 619 squadron. This is Lloyd’s aircraft (see above photo of the three lads).

    I’d like to know when they were up, and if at all possible, arguably by calculation with reference to expected times or other aircraft from 619, a “window” for when they would have been expected over the target.

    Many thanks once again, Don

    in reply to: 617 Squadron Lancasters. #1298469
    Smith
    Participant

    Manning the FN-64

    Odd question right enough….this is the pice from the book…. Best Wishes. Robert.

    re. the 3 Group retention of the FN-64 … how was that turret manned? Was there a separate crew-man or did one of the other air-gunners man that position (eg. maybe the front/bomb-aimer)? Thanks Don

Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 1,284 total)