dark light

Spiteful

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 178 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: A few spitfire questions #1195182
    Spiteful
    Participant

    I have a picture somewhere of ML417 taken at or around D-Day and that’s the configuration I would like to see her put back into.

    I’ve always thought it would be great to convert ML417 back in to a T IX., but back into her D-Day config would be great also.

    in reply to: A few spitfire questions #1196545
    Spiteful
    Participant

    Thanks Mark.
    Comparing to this picture (found on internet – couldn’t see who to credit, apologies) It looks like a Vokes to me on EP120? What do you think?

    http://www.warbirds.be/foto/albums/userpics/10002/Supermarine_Spitfire_Mk_Vc_JG891.JPG

    in reply to: A few spitfire questions #1196673
    Spiteful
    Participant

    Thanks for the info on the rudder, makes sense now.

    Mark – do you have a copy of the picture available that could be enlarged? Looking at it in detail, I can see that background shapes could cause the illusion of a Vokes filter, but comparing it with a photo of JG891 at a similar angle – the shape and the way the light falls and the focus look spot on to me?

    in reply to: A few spitfire questions #1197467
    Spiteful
    Participant

    Thanks for all the replies.

    Bruce – the picture I have is in the 2002 Flypast ‘Spitfires on the wing’ suppliment at the bottom of page 9. The visible serial is EP120, but I admit some aircraft have had the incorrect serial applied before.

    Thanks again.

    in reply to: Booker Spitfire Mk.1 AR213 G-AIST (merged) #1210578
    Spiteful
    Participant

    Thanks Tom, that explains it!

    She really does look fantastic. Can’t wait to see her in the metal at Duxford.

    in reply to: Booker Spitfire Mk.1 AR213 G-AIST (merged) #1211669
    Spiteful
    Participant

    Great article and photo’s of AR213 in this month’s Aeroplane magazine. She looks fantastic.

    I noticed on the underwing photo’s that there are no ammunition ejector chutes? Where they covered over during the restoration?

    in reply to: Supermarine Spiteful, what are the possibilities #1227553
    Spiteful
    Participant

    Do the drawings exist for the wings of a Spiteful/Seafang/Attacker?

    in reply to: Supermarine Spiteful, what are the possibilities #1227621
    Spiteful
    Participant

    😀

    http://1000aircraftphotos.com/APS/2918L.jpg

    Would be great to see one recreated. How much original Spiteful is known to still exist?

    in reply to: BA 777 Emergency Landing Short of Runway at LHR #537466
    Spiteful
    Participant

    Not related at all.

    From Flightglobal.com:

    AA 777 engine incident: tests support ‘impeded throttle’ theory
    By David Kaminski-Morrow

    Preliminary investigations into last week’s throttle-response failure on an American Airlines Boeing 777-200ER suggest that a simple inadvertent obstruction of the throttle lever might have been responsible.

    The aircraft had been approaching Los Angeles on 28 February, with its engines at flight-idle power and the auto-throttle engaged, when its left-hand powerplant apparently did not respond to a command for more thrust. Although the right-hand engine behaved normally, the left remained at flight-idle for 10-15 seconds before its thrust increased.

    American’s incident came just six weeks after an identical British Airways aircraft crashed short of the runway at London Heathrow when both engines failed to respond to a thrust-increase command. Both carriers’ 777-200s are fitted with Rolls-Royce Trent 800 engines.

    But a source familiar with the American inquiry says that, despite the parallels, initial findings suggest the two incidents are “very different”.

    Crucially, flight-data recorder information from the American 777 – which includes the angle of the throttle levers – shows that the speed-brake was extended, and the left-hand throttle remained around the flight-idle position while the right-hand throttle moved forward.

    Investigators have discovered no evidence of mechanical or fuel-related problems. But simulations and nearly three hours of flight tests, combined with information from the flight recorders and the crew, have turned up a potential explanation.

    Because the speed-brake on a 777 is located to the immediate left of the two throttle levers, the first officer must reach over the throttles to activate it. The flight tests demonstrated that the first officer on the American Airlines flight might have unintentionally obstructed the left-hand throttle lever, preventing its moving forward when commanded by the auto-throttle.

    Just 700g (1.5lb) of pressure would be enough to impede the throttle, and the resulting differential thrust would have initially been corrected by the autopilot, through the rudder, and by the aircraft’s thrust-asymmetry compensation system.

    If the pilots were concentrating on the approach, says the source, the combination of these circumstances would have made the onset of the problem “almost unnoticeable” until the resulting yaw became significant.

    in reply to: BBMF spit loses "Something" yesterday.. Pilot ok. #1223946
    Spiteful
    Participant

    While I agree reducing unecessary red tape for the sake of it can be a good thing, my opinion in this case it is a bit more than a slight mishap.

    If this has happened once, then an investigation and report into the incident is the least I would expect (and I’m sure will happen), to establish the cause, and any mitigation actions that could be put into place.

    These aircraft regularly fly in formation together, and display near crowds – if this were to happen in one of these instances the outcome could be different.

    Like all I am extremely glad that this incident passed without too much damage, but I’m sure we all would agree safety is number 1, so if we have a chance to learn anything from these events which could stop repeats again the future I think it is a must.

    in reply to: Griffon Aero V Griffon Marine #1247522
    Spiteful
    Participant

    The RR Spit also has the ex Shac Griffon modification, so there should be no difference in flight to the BBMF aircraft.

    in reply to: Rekkof #550120
    Spiteful
    Participant

    The engines are rumoured to be the same as on the 717. Not RR, but BMW

    The BR715, as fitted to the B717 was a joint BMW/RR engine. BMW sold their half of the company to RR, so it is now a RR engine… 🙂

    in reply to: Supermarine Rolls Royce S6 #1298170
    Spiteful
    Participant

    So what did happen to the original S1596?

    Also intersting that N248 is in such good condition after all this time – especially considering it sank and was raised again!

    in reply to: Spits recovered in PNG paging Mark12 #1321206
    Spiteful
    Participant

    In Peter Vacher’s book on his Hurricane, he mentions that there were a few Spitfires in the jungles on the India/Burma borders.

    Not sure if anyone has any further knowledge on these aircraft?

    in reply to: Pembrokeshire Spitfire identity question #1257730
    Spiteful
    Participant

    The welshspitfire.com site also states there are only 3 airworthy Mk VIII’s – does MT719 not count?

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 178 total)