merlins over malta dvd is superb…very much recommended, the last two books mentioned are brilliant!
That’s what the search function’s for. Suggested keywords include “dambusters” “jackson” and “ni…” I mean “trigger”.
Ahh right so any newbie to the forum has to use the Search function first and search all possible subjects they wish to discuss? :confused: :rolleyes:
Merlins? Er…They look more like Hurricanes and Spitfires to me?
Where’s the big green helicopter?
…er…..umm…..?
๐ Jees you kill me! :rolleyes: ๐ก
All I’m going to say is this. My photos are crap, my equipment is crap and none of my pictures are ground-to-air, and many out of focus. I enjoy them for what they are, for the memories etc. I would not post them, ever, on a forum alive with more or less pro guys with the top end gear and experience to match. If I do post, it is alway done with a certain disclaimer of quality.
Your photos Ollie are sometimes a bit dodgy, out of focus, blurred etc. Nothing I could do better, however, I do not think EN830 has to go all the way to the other forum and be a pain in the back side there. He is just telling the truth. When you are competing/comparing with (arguably) the best of the class, you will get a knock down once in a while. If you had been at it as long as some of these guys, with the correct equipment, you would be at their level, but you are not at the moment. So keep practicing, keep shooting aeroplanes but do not expect universal approval right away. In 30 years time you might be the greatest photographer of aeroplanes, but at the moment you are not! EN830 is not a pain in the **se, that should be elsewhere, he is just telling the truth as it is right before our eyes.
Keep shooting Ollie. Keep it to your self until it is of real quality. Then post. Do not say people are having a dig because they do not like your photos, because, frankly, some of them are best kept a secret
So where does it say in Forum Rules that you can only post ‘decent quality pictures’ :confused:
I cringe reading this forum at times, yes I know I can go elsewhere but some people on here are so far up their own ar$ยฃ its unreal.
Back to topic, Best Airshow venue in the country (thats just my opinion) Looks bright and sunny although ground might bea bit damp…….Then again its a long wait till next May! ๐
I was unaware a ‘complete’ Hampden existed, if I can use the word ‘complete’ ๐ฎ
An intereting aeroplane, I know some parts are at the RAFM, are any other Hampdens in existance? :confused:
Undoubtedly the most beautiful aeroplane ever designed…Wasn’t sure if we are supposed to be picking civil or military?
No doubting the beauty of the Hunter however I’d have to say the Folland Gnat!
Just watched my DVD for the second time…(I know I know but TV is trash! ๐ฎ )
I think its only really just dawned on me that this project was truely unique, I cant think of anything similar that has ever been attempted, all this the effort of a handful of people…Thing is, will we ever see its likes again? ๐
Mr Foster replied in much the same vein to me, calling my reaction ‘hysterical’ ๐ก
Mr Foster said to me today:
I can tell you categorically 1) This crash and backgrounders have been treated in the same fair and thorough way as we treat all significant news stories and 2) you and your fellow pilots may object to the word stunt but this is not shared by the rest of us
When you are prepared to drop the insulting manner of your communications, then we can make some progress.
Yours sincerely
James Foster
Deputy Editor, Cambridge Evening News
(01223) 434308
I simply pointed out that like his use of the word ‘stunt’ that the word ‘bas tard’ can mean different things to different people when used in different contects. :rolleyes:
I also wondered if my concern was of a political/religous nature would he treat my concern with the same disregard?
What a load of fuss about nothing! The ‘offending’ article simply states things in a tabloid manner, that said with poor / incorrect spelling . To compare a badly mishandled display manouvre as akin to the ‘level of risk’ incured in day to day commercial aviation is pretty amature.
Sorry CW, just expressing my views on a ‘FORUM’ ๐
I might pick up a couple more. A great reminder of Ray Hanna. I notice the Spitfire model has no Pilot in it where as the Mustang does…I wonder if this was deliberate?
Thank you for your email regarding the report into the latest accident at Duxford.
However, I am at a loss to understand your reaction to the report.
In my dictionary, a stunt is a โa difficult or often showy performanceโ.
I think you seem to be reading some kind of slang meaning into our use of the word. This is present only in your own mind, especially as we use the word “tragically” in the same sentence.
We are using the word in its sense of stunt flying or stunt aerobatics, which is an established and normal use of the word.
Turning to your criticism of the word nosedive, I again rely on my dictionary. It refers to a nosedive as โa headlong plunge or to drop or decline sharplyโ. The use of this word emphasises the dramatic and uncontrolled nature of the incident. It is a legitimate word for the general reader.
Our newspaper has been a major supporter of Duxford and its airshows. We offer the museum enormous pre and post publicity and our relations are excellent.
However, when a serious incident occurs such as last week’s, our readers are entitled to be reminded about other relatively recent incidents involving Duxford.
Our readers live close by to this important and active air museum. They have a right to ensure its activities are properly scrutinised.
Yours sincerely
James Foster
Deputy Editor, Cambridge Evening News
(01223) 434308
Well, what a complete ignorant ar$e ๐ก Hell be getting a phone call tomorrow
Ordered mine from mh434.com and they arrived today.
Models are very nice with some excellent detail, look great on my desk! ๐
Highly recommended and a good cause! ๐
Journalism has gone to the dogs in my opinion! ๐ก
One of the crew members went to hospital, is he out now?
Just out of curiosity, which part of the report did you object to, and on what grounds?
I dont understand why they have to give us an incident by incident run down on all crashes at Duxford in the past 10 years…Its totally uncalled for.
Then to describe the FireFly Crash as a Nosedive Stunt is completly ignorant and shows that to be a journalist these days you need to find to be completley ignorant!
They dont give us a detailed breakdown every time there is an accident on the M11 so why is this different….I’ll tell you why! Because they are idiots !
The only reason Sky turned up on the Sunday of Legends was for ‘Doom Watch’
Its Sick and I’m BLOODY ANGRY!