I agree with Roger – I would have said Warwick – werent the early Warwicks referred as Wellington MK….????

Always thought the Warwick was a splendid looking aeroplane!

TT

Other way round IIRC.

We had a discussion about this a while back and I think the Wellington prototype was a modified Warwick.

I’ll try to beat the search engine into submission.

Here: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=32251

I should remember it, I posted it.

You would actually go that far to see it then Andy?

Excellent programmes – both of them. The one on BBC4 afterwards was similar but not the same.

I thought the Med was supposed to be shallow. 3,000ft isn’t shallow.

Thanks for all your notes and the photos. I wonder what people think of the beacon at North Weald. Does anyone care if it lives or dies. Should it be preserved?

Do you live near Derby?

Somebody sent me a note saying:

There is a very nice restored one (airfield beacon) on Crich Stand, a few hundred yards of Crich village, easily seen from the A6 Derby to Matlock Road. This unique structure was built in the 1920s as a memorial to the fallen Sherwood Foresters of WW1. It was to serve as both as a memorial to the dead and to be an aerial lighthouse. It is by far the most architecturally ornate one I have seen.

Does anyone have a photo of this? I want to see if it is worth starting a campaign to restore the Hatfield Beacon.

I’m about 20 miles away from Crich Stand. My mate can actually see it from his house but I don’t think he’s got a telephoto lens long enough. 🙂

When I’ve fixed my brakes, again, I’ll take a wander over there.

Washout, James and Ollie are both sort of right, although a little extreme. Not so much more leading edge down as less leading edge up, if you see what I mean. 🙂

Washin would be the opposite. I arrived at a mates’ house many years ago in time to see him building the wing for an R/C P-47. It was a few minutes before it sunk in that he’d got packing under the outboard leading edge instead of trailing edge. He’d misread the instructions. Would have given “interesting” flying characteristics.

The Mossie book I mentioned earlier is available through Abebooks at prices ranging from quite a lot of money for a paperback to eyewatering for a signed hardback.

There is nothing particularly complicated about a Mosquito – if you’re an aircraft manufacturing company with 20+ years experience of building wooden aircraft. 🙂

The techniques involved had been used by DH before, not least on the Albatross only 2 or 3 years earlier. Certainly they had to be revised or strengthened but it wasn’t like it is now, trying to re-learn long forgotten ideas.

Mosquito books, there are dozens. The one generally accepted to be the definitive article is called Mosquito, by C. Martin Sharp and Michael J. F Bowyer and was published in 1967 by Faber. It cost an arm and a leg at that time and myself and my dad had to wait until it came out in paperback and still bought it between us in 1971. It cost about 25 pints as a paperback!

The ISBN numbers are 0 571 04750 5 for the hardback and 0 571 09531 3 for the “paper covered”.

Thanks Melv. You posted while I was laboriously typing my reply. I started using aliphatic resins on model aircraft years ago and wouldn’t return to PVA.

James, I’m sure you’re right about a very long scarfe joint but I think you’d need to cut away an awful lot of the original wing to join the mainspar, which is a pretty hefty lump of timber(s). Stressed to 50 tons, IIRC.

You’re certainly right about PVA glues. When Evostik Resin “W” first appeared, 25 years or so ago, my granddad carried out a scientific test on it to see if their claims were true.
He glued two bits of wood together, clamped them correctly for the recommended time – and then ran over them with his van. They were right. 🙂

Edit.
To add to the above regarding PVA glue. Apparently they’re not generally suitable for guitar building as they have a tendency to creep over time. Not ideal on a wingspar, at a guess. Melv, comments?

Glues have improved massively over the last 65+ years. I suspect, if only for glue reasons, better quality plywood would be available too, although whether it would be suitable or acceptable for aviation use is a different matter.

IIRC, Bruce said that when they X-Rayed (? sonic?, whatever…) TA634 they found unglued areas that appeared to have been there from new. Without wishing to denigrate the original workforce, who presumably were working under extreme pressure, restoration organisations now seem to work on the basis that perfection is the absolute minimum required standard.

Having said all that – yes, stark raving bonkers. 🙂