Page 94 – Key Publishing

Mr Creosote

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,396 through 1,410 (of 1,719 total)

← 1 2 3 … 93 94 95 … 113 114 115 →

Author

Posts
October 30, 2008 at 11:54 am in reply to: ross and brand what next? #1896082

Mr Creosote
Participant

I don’t agree with this “bandwagon” argument, ie that only two actual listeners complained at the time and so therefore it doesn’t matter. How is it different to anything else we react to when we read about it in the meeja, but never personally experience? I object to the “So-what-I-don’t give-a F- about you or anyone” attitude this kind of thing exemplifies and engenders, and if being deliberately offensive and saying inappropriate things is “cutting edge” comedy then Gawd elp us. I grew out of that kind of thing when I was about 12. The trouble with these so called comedians who lack imagination or invention and have to rely instead on the shock factor is that sooner or later they will inevitably overstep the mark and genuinely offend too many people. Look what happened to Kenny Everett after his “joke” about Michael Foot, or Hale & Pace after their sketch about putting a cat in the microwave. I like to think Russell Brand’s career will go down the pan in a similar way, but somehow I doubt it. As for Woss, I think he’s past it anyway.

October 30, 2008 at 8:08 am in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1238083

Mr Creosote
Participant

I’m sure you’ll remember this one from the other place,

Only too well. 😡 😡

October 29, 2008 at 7:54 pm in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1238362

Mr Creosote
Participant

Correct of course, Jose. Thought the Bird Dog connection would give it away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher_FL-23

Over to you.

October 29, 2008 at 10:20 am in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1238688

Mr Creosote
Participant

That just leaves the first photo, and I think someone will get that soon (Benyboy is on the right track) Maybe we should keep it to one “live” challenge at a time, otherwise it could get a bit confusing (if it isn’t already :))

October 28, 2008 at 8:35 pm in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1239021

Mr Creosote
Participant

Surprised that after nearly 500 views no one has yet identified the first picture. It was designed by John W Thorp to compete for a major US Army contract, but was withdrawn after the sole example lost its tail on a test flight and was badly damaged. The large perspex area to the rear is a dead giveaway as to its intended role.

October 28, 2008 at 1:50 pm in reply to: If you were making a video on vintage aeroplanes it would contain ……. #1162442

Mr Creosote
Participant

Most of us only get to see vintage aircraft at a handful of air displays, so how about a sequence showing what’s involved; invitation, planning, costs, flying to the show, actual display, meeting other teams/pilots, departure, etc. And as someone else said, no crappy rock music, just succinct & informed commentary where required and the sound of the aircraft. Oh, and accuracy. Nothing spoils a video for me like some silly remark such as “When the RAF’s Bulldogs and Tiger Moths tangled with Richtofen over the western front…”

October 27, 2008 at 3:51 pm in reply to: Invitation to read an Argentinian view of the Falklands conflict #1163079

Mr Creosote
Participant

Can you translate the rest please, Moggy? No rush. This evening will be fine. 😀

October 27, 2008 at 8:51 am in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1163370

Mr Creosote
Participant

No takers? 🙁 OK, a few clues, just in case anyone is interested. It’s a one-off first flown in 1950, and lost out to what became a classic Cessna type.

October 24, 2008 at 10:06 am in reply to: Supermarine paint #1165607

Mr Creosote
Participant

‘Health and Efficiancy’ mentioned this one years ago ! possibly 1958 ?

Health & Efficiency? Not the sort of pictures I remember… 😉

October 24, 2008 at 9:20 am in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1165718

Mr Creosote
Participant

Morning, Jose. Yer, didn’t want to get bogged down in 1939 east European one-offs. 🙂

October 23, 2008 at 12:10 pm in reply to: Pop star in plane scare. #503439

Mr Creosote
Participant

This whole new-fangled flying malarkey is clearly dangerous and must stop immediately. As Benny Hill once said, “If God had meant us to fly, he would have given us the tickets”

October 23, 2008 at 11:36 am in reply to: Why no Spitfire trainer in 1940? #1166557

Mr Creosote
Participant

I think you’ll find that a few hundred Harvards arrived in the UK during 1938, Mr C.

True enough Jose, but I’m thinking of the days when the Spitfire & Hurricane were still on the drawing boards.

http://www.spitfiresociety.demon.co.uk/supermar.htm

All this time “R.J.” was also designing another fighter but he did not make this public until the failure of the Type 224 was plain to see. Supermarine decided to build this aircraft as a private venture under the Air Ministry Specification F37/34. The Spitfire was born.

They must have realised even then what a massive leap it would be from Gladiators, Furies, Bulldogs etc, and wondered how pilots would cope with making the transition. I guess they had two choices and of course we all know now that they went with the advanced trainers that were to emerge on both sides of the pond. Just wondering if way back in the early days they didn’t at least sketch conversion trainers.

October 23, 2008 at 9:06 am in reply to: Why no Spitfire trainer in 1940? #1166709

Mr Creosote
Participant

I read to same book – excellent read – and what struck me was why nobody told him how to do a night landing. He near killed himself working out how to do it. What are instructors for?

Welcome to the forum, NB26. Bit more about Wellum’s later life here-

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/geoffrey-wellum-prize-fighter-644419.html

Re the possibility of an early Spitfire conversion trainer, I think J Boyle probably hit the nail on the head when he said that losses were expected and tolerated. But even with the Harvard and Master, the Spitfire and Hurricane were such a quantum leap over previous fighters, I can’t help wondering if the powers-that-be didn’t at least consider a two-seater. Come to think of it, when the new monoplanes were being designed, were things like the Harvard even in existence, or was it intended to go straight from Moths and Maggies onto the hot new fighters? Anyone know how the early accident rate compared with previous fighters?

October 22, 2008 at 12:18 pm in reply to: Less Common Post-1939 Transport Aircraft #1167425

Mr Creosote
Participant

Lockheed Saturn, anyone? (Cant post pictures here at work, sorry) If memory serves, the only Lockheed transport that didn’t make it.

October 22, 2008 at 10:49 am in reply to: Miller M-5 Belly Flopper #1167486

Mr Creosote
Participant

Miller
Erven A Miller, Milwaukee WI.
1938 = 2pOM; 95hp Cirrus Mk III. Registered to Erven (misspelled “Irven”) Miller and Lester Sell [18239].

2 1933 = 2pOmwM; 100hp Kinner. A 1p version appears in registers as a racer, perhaps a modification of this model [12990].

M-5 Belly Flopper 1946 = 1pClwM; two 40hp Continental; span: 28’0″. Pilot flew in a prone position. POP: 1 [N29113].

M-6 Twin c.1957 = 3pChwM; two 65hp Lycoming O-145-B2. A much-modified Piper J-5 Cruiser with engines mounted on the wing leading edges. Fuselage nose was fitted with a streamlined fairing and ends of the wings squared. [N9074C].

http://www.aerofiles.com/_mi.html

Cheers, Zoot. Love to see a picture, if anyone has one.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 1,396 through 1,410 (of 1,719 total)

← 1 2 3 … 93 94 95 … 113 114 115 →