dark light

DH106

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 98 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Nigerian DC-10 in last issue #498972
    DH106
    Participant

    It always saddens me to hear of such a beautiful aircraft as the DC10 being scrapped

    DC10 beautiful ?? 😮
    It’s gotta be the ugly sister between it and the L1011.
    Now THAT is a beautiful plane 😉

    in reply to: Ryanair base at Leeds/Bradford #518001
    DH106
    Participant

    I have to take exception with this. I have flown allot to Europe/Ireland/Scotland from Stansted using Ryanair and many of those occasions I pad a total of 2p for a return flight. The 1p flights DO exist.

    But any fuel surcharges / airport tax etc. ? I think that’s what people are getting at. There’s a great tendency for airlines to split ‘everything’ off the main package nowdays to hide the true cost of a flight.

    in reply to: Dumped Airliners #1259627
    DH106
    Participant

    Thanks for that info T-21. What’s your source ?

    in reply to: Dumped Airliners #1260015
    DH106
    Participant

    Whilst I was doing a search for the point of departure of an ATR42 that sadly hit high ground today, I noticed these airframes at Merida in Venezuela;

    Both these sets of satellite piccies are from Merida MEXICO not Venezuela right?

    The big one is defintely a Douglas quad – from Google Earth I make the dimensions to be wingspan approx 118ft, length approx 104ft. This matches well with a Douglas DC-6B, span 117ft 6in, length 105ft 7in (from airliners.net). The DC-7’s range in length from 108ft 11in to 112ft 3in so this is probably a DC-6 rather than DC-7.
    “OldProps” lists no less than 6 DC-6’s extant in Mexico – but non listed as at Merida.:confused:

    This one looks promising if still extant:
    http://www.airliners.net/photo/Pescamex/Douglas-C-118…-Liftmaster/1041563/L/

    in reply to: Battle of Britain Day petition (please read and sign) #1310790
    DH106
    Participant

    The whole mentality behind the reasoning for the Arrows not to appear is so STUPID. We must be the only country in the World where we consider it bad to be PROUD to be a citizen of that country. Can you imagine, for instance – the Americans being told not to fly the Stars & Stripes at their events cos it might upset other countries/cultures? They’d be laughed off the face of the Earth. How infantile this all is.
    If I’m not as proud to be British as I used to be – it’s because we have idiots like the one’s spouting this rubbish up there in our government…:mad:

    in reply to: Skegness Aerodrome. #1260934
    DH106
    Participant

    Thanks Lindy’s Lad – followed this thread a while back but obviously hadn’t caught up with the latest posts – that’ll teach me 😮

    in reply to: Skegness Aerodrome. #1261068
    DH106
    Participant

    Just trying to see if there’s any traces of the old airfield on Google Earth – I can make out the Butlin’s Complex to the north of the new airfield – where was the old field in relation? Can anyone give me a lat/long? Thanks 🙂

    in reply to: Carvair parts :¬) #1276520
    DH106
    Participant

    Any update on the book, Patrick? – I’d love a copy too 🙂

    in reply to: Quantas 707 Flaps #1251350
    DH106
    Participant

    If you look at the one on the other side though, it looks a more conventional angle? Perhaps its an optical illusion after all?

    I think it is an optical illusion.

    The flap mountings are raked at the angle of sweep of the trailling edge and I think that this combined with the large angle of deflection cause the illusion.

    And….. common sense would dictate that there’d be a large lift/drag asymmetry if the flaps were set at such a different angle. I can’t see this being a ‘real’ thing.

    in reply to: Cosford VC-10 #1299533
    DH106
    Participant

    There are some thoughts about those photos here: http://www.vc10.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=133 I think they are ZA142 (which is the one on the Airliners.net photo TobyV linked to) and XV103. The cockpit could be the remains of ZA144 of which the front section might still be around (see here for a photo).

    Yes, I think you’ve nailed ’em – XV103, ZA142 & the cockpit of ZA144 🙂

    in reply to: Cosford VC-10 #1301521
    DH106
    Participant

    Hmmmm…. XV103 is my favourite for the one with the roundals and tail-less.

    in reply to: Cosford VC-10 #1301853
    DH106
    Participant

    was the VC10 really that bad condition wise though?

    I remember reading about the prototype Super VC10 being flown into St Athan for scrapping. No public outcry over that one either?

    Interesting… slightly off-topic, but looking at St. Athan with Google Earth at the north-east of the airfield there’s a VC-10 in the early stages of being broken up. It has roundals on the wings which would make it one of the transports rather than a tanker. These Google Earth images are usually a couple of years old – generally 2003ish, so any ideas which VC-10? If you look carefully there’s a cockpit from another one nearby. Also, in the north-west side there’s an engineless VC-10 tanker – awaiting the same fate ?

    in reply to: General Discussion #356959
    DH106
    Participant

    I haven’t 🙂

    in reply to: Bader – The 'Carry On' thread #1947960
    DH106
    Participant

    I haven’t 🙂

    in reply to: Buried Lancasters.(2004 thread) #1304645
    DH106
    Participant

    I think burying is a very quick and easy way to get rid of things and it has been done for a long time. And it is a good way to quickly camouflage things. They probably had other things on their mind besides getting rid of aircraft in an environmental friendly way.

    I can’t get my head round the concept of just ‘throwing away’ surplus aircraft by burying them though. In the post WW2 days when rationing of food etc. went on for quite some time, presumably supplies of valuable raw materials like aluminium etc. were in short supply too. So wouldn’t you scrap/smelter old & surplus a/c?

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 98 total)