WJ244We currently have a similar problem at Southend.
In the 1960’s the council wanted to develop the airport to take jets. Channel Airways had acquired BAC 111 and Tridents and other operators were supposedly interested so a plan was drawn up to extend 33/15 into the fields beyond the airport boundary. The approach and take off were over the least populated parts of the surrounding area so it was the best that could be done if the airport was to grow. Then the NIMBYs surfaced and the whole project was shelved, Channel Airways went bust partly through the increased cost of trying to operate from two bases and the town lost a load of jobs.
Over the years parts of the airport were sold off and the end of 33/15 was developed into a retail park so the airfield only has 06/24 now with a church on the threshold at one end together with a road directly outside the airport fence and a railway line crossing the other end of the runway on the airfield boundary.
40 odd years later the current management want to develop the airport. It is proving very difficult to overcome the problems of obstructions on the boundaries and the NIMBYs have surfaced again.
Truth is if the original NIMBYs had kept their gobs shut our airport would have prospered for the past 40 odd years instead of slowly declining and we would have had far more jobs in the area. This would have meant more workers who need houses near the airport which would probably have meant an increase in property prices so the NIMBYs could have sold their houses at a profit to the new workers and gone to live on a desert island away from all the aircraft noise.
The current NIMBY view is that the airport wasn’t busy when they bought their houses so why should they allow it to get busier and supposedly devalue their properties now. They are also opposed to an industrial estate or housing on the airport land as the increase in traffic may devalue their homes so presumerably they expect to leave a huge area of land derelict once they have managed to close the airport – no that can’t be a viable alternative either as the derelict land would be an eyesore and that might devalue their homes!
WJ244Planes of Fame are supposed to own (and I presume display) a Le Vier Cosmic Wind “Miss Cosmic Wind”. I believe this is a rebuild of Cosmic Wind “Minnow” with a shoulder wing but have never been able to confirm this or find any pictures. Did anyone who went to Chino see and better still photograph their Cosmic Wind and if so would it be possible to either post the pictures or arrange to email me copies. I want them purely for myself as the Cosmic Wind and the history of the airframes has been a special interest fo me for over 35 years but there are still some gaps in the history, particularly of “Minnow”, Miss Cosmic Wind and Robin Voice’s Filly (which I believe may contain at least some original parts from “Minnow” which I have never been able to fill.
Sorry if this is a bit off thread but as the thread is about Planes of Fame it seemed a reasonable place to ask.
I have already tried emailing them for a potted history and maybe a photo but got no reply.
WJ244Assuming it is the correct mark and you want to be really different why not paint it as Lefty Gardeners White Lightning or any of the other pylon racers. Sorry if this offends the sensibilities of those who believe we should only see military marks on warbirds but I am a great fan of the pylon racers.
WJ244Not quite sure what first got me interested in aircraft. I remember a friend at junior school had Timothys Book of Aircraft when I was about 8 years old and the school library had the Longacre Book of Aircraft but I was already into aeroplanes before that having pestered my dad to build me a 1/72 Spitfire from a Revell kit. Other early influences were The Eagle comic with it’s cutaway drawings, a 1961 Civil Aircraft Recognition given to me by a neighbour of my grand parents and my grandad gave me one volume of Aircraft of The fighting Powers which was (and still is) much read and greatly treasured.
I also remember reading “Building For Those Magnificent Men” by Derek Piggot when I was about 11 and this triggered my interest in early aircraft.
WJ244She looks superb. Hope to get to Old Warden on 2 August and see her in the air assuming the paperwork etc allows her to display by then.
WJ244Bill Francis Spitfire certainly seems the most likely candidate. Bills house was on the corner of Oaken Grange Drive and Hampton Gardens but as far as I remember there was barely enough room for a dismantled Spitfire and definitely no room for an orchard.
If the aircraft your friend remembers was standing on its wheels then it couldn’t have been Bill Francis Spitfire and I was never aware of anything else even remotely Spitfire like in any other local garden at that time.
The only other aircraft that I can think of which comes close to the description is the prototype Taylor Titch G-ATYO whch was built in the Southend area and was camofllauged but it crashed in 1967 killing pilot/builder John Taylor. It is just possible that the Titch looked like a Spitfire to a young child but the dates are a bit out.
WJ244The entry in the enlarged (probably 2nd) edition of Veteran and vintage Aircraft by Leslie Hunt states
HEREFORD RAF Credenhill Spitfire 5 AB871 / M4353. In the City 124 ATC Sqdn have Vampire T11 XE982, No 22 Special Air Service Sqdn have Vampire T11 WZ550 / 7902M.
The third edition states
HEREFORD RAF Credenhill Hawker F1 WT612 and WT651. Vampire T11 XE982 / 7564M is with 124 Sqdn ATC. Vampire T11 WZ550 / 7902M is with HQ’s Special Air Service Sqdn. Spitfire XVI TE392.
Wrecks and Relics 9th edition 1984 says that both the parade ground Hunters had moved to Halton by June 1983 leaving only spitfire XVI TE392 / 7000M. It also says under Hereford that 124 Sqdn ATC still keep Vampire T11 XE982 /7564M in Eign Road.
This all just seems to muddy the waters and implies that there were 2 vampires in the area and possibly 2 Spitfire gate guards at different times (which may explain the camouflaged and silver paint finishes mentioned in previous posts) plus a couple of early Hunters. I am sure MK12 can set the record straight on the Spitfires.
WJ244As I have said before I was a volunteer at Southend. As a 15 year old I spent my weekends climbing onto aircraft to strip paint with a bucket of water between 3 or 4 of us to wash the stripper off both the aircraft and ourselves (Nitromoors burns just a bit on your skin). I remember working beside another volunteer who stepped on a patch of stripper and disappeared over the trailing edge of the Lincoln wing – fortunately he was shaken but unhurt. We moved aircraft including the Lincoln with rope bridles and a tractor walking beside the wheels and chocking them as fast as possible if the aircraft started to catch up with the tractor and worked on the top of most of our heavies including the Beverley with no harnesses or safety rails and I enjoyed every minute of it.
In those days it was all part of being a volunteer and if you got hurt it was usually your own fault. It is in some ways unfortunate that those days are now long gone. I accept we did sometimes take quite serious risks but the pendulum has now swung firmly too far in the other direction and it must be very hard for museums to get volunteers involved in doing anything really worthwhile, particularly the young, simply because they have to be so over protective towards any worker.
I am saddened by the poor state of the paint on some museum aircraft but having been on the other side of the fence I also understand why it is impossible for all exhibits to be immaculate all the time and know that museums do their best with their available resources.
I take my hat off to Newark and all the other small museums that continue to survive in these difficult times and thinking about it there is a large museum very close to the M11 that has been known to have the odd scruffy airframe from time to time and they are much better funded than Newark BUT they are still doing their best and everything is in a queue for remedial work albeit with so many exhibits it is often inevitably a much longer queue.
WJ244Having read the post on WIX and the other posts here it does appear that the authorities in all major areas where historic aircraft are operated seem to be getting over zealous and in many cases may lack a true understanding of the nature of warbirds and the problems in operating and maintaining them and in procuring parts.
It makes me fear for the long term operation of many types and it would be better for everyone if a large dose of common sense could be injected but as others here have said most of the common sense disappeared when the old hands who knew and understood historic aircraft retired.
I went to the recent general aviation show at Booker. It was a bit of an eye opener after many years of little interest in anything non-vintage and I hadn’t appreciated just how far construction techniques have moved on.
I did notice that a lot of composite materials such as carbon fibre are used in structural areas of airframes now.
My attempts to restore a 40+ year old kit car have made me realise that there can be problems with less traditional materials and I wonder how the structures of modern light aircraft will fare over time. I am sure there are inspection procedures for the modern materials but perhaps the powers that be would be spending their time more usefully by looking at future resolutions for the problems that will inevitably arise with modern materials rather than making life very difficult for those who operate aicraft built using traditional materials and maintained ina proven and well tried manner.
For example:- I know that ceconite wasn’t an original spec covering for a Spitfire rudder but if it is good enough for use on aerobatic aircraft generating high levels of G then surely there is no problem using it on a Spitfire. If the issue is that the operator should have asked first then that is fair enough but if you want people to ask first then you have to give them the expectation that reasonable requests will receive a positive response.
WJ244It won’t help with your immediate problem but longer term are you sure the unleaded won’t attack the seals etc in the fuel system. I have heard stories from the classic car and motorcycle world of problems with melting seals etc because unleaded attacks some types of rubber, plastic, nylon etc which were quite happy to put up with leaded fuels.
As I said this won’t help with the immediate problem but may be something to consider for the future.
WJ244These may not be Auster promotional pictures as they don’t show a two tone colour scheme. Aopologies if you have already seen them elsewhere. The bottom one looks like a good candidate for the “How low can you go” thread
WJ244There is an alternative – yes, buy it and restore it. If space is at a premium, why not loan it to a museum collection? I for one would have need of one or five replica Spits if my project becomes more than just a headache…. The aircraft remains your property, you can work on it anytime, they get a useful exhibit, you get to keep your missus…
This worked very well at Southend 30 odd years ago. The museum got to use TB863 as an attraction – and they got plenty of mileage out of it by plastering “see the Spitfire” across every ad and handbill that they printed – and Bill Francis got far better facilities to work on the airframe than he had when it was squeezed into his back garden.
As long as you make sure the museum is reputable and not one where you are likely to turn up one day and find the place locked up and empty then it should work for everyone.
Alternatively you could always do what car collector Albert Obrist did years ago- extend the grage and build a glass wall so that you can sit on the settee and gaze at your pride and joy (the aeroplane – oh and maybe the girlfriend as well) whenever you feel like it.
WJ244The Aeroplane Pictorial Review No3 has a 3/4 front shot of the starboard side of ZK-BMI which is probably the Auster publicity photo you mentioned. There is also a near head on flying shot but no registration is visible.
WJ244Not sure about coal dust but it rings a bell that it had been used to transport horses and they found a fair bit of very old and dried manure under the floor which must have caused much of the corrosion problems. I remember that the article which mentioned the horse manure speculated that the smell inside must have been pretty bad at times when the Air Scouts used the York as a bunk house because it hadn’t been out of service for long at that time and the manure must have been pretty fresh.
WJ244I visited Lasham a good 20 years ago to return switch boxes and other cockpit parts for the Drover which I had taken home when I was a teenager at the Southend Museum. The intention was to restore them at home but the work didn’t get far – lots of teenage enthusiasm but not enough knowledge or money to buy materials. At one point there was a prominent member of the management at Southend who appeared to have a policy of throwing away any parts which weren’t securly attached to an airframe so I kept the Drover parts until I could be sure that they would be reunited with the aeroplane. I couldn’t find them during Bill Gent’s time as curator as they were buried in a shed but Bill knew I had them and was happy for me to return them when found. The shed didn’t get cleared until a house move long after the museum had closed so I reunited the Drover and her cockpit electrics at Lasham.
During the visit the workers told me that Doug Arnold owned the Drover so it seems odd that it is still there now. I was also told they had huge problems removing the spar bolts to move her from Southend.
She was in a bit of a state when I first got close up at Southend around 1970. The flaps had rotted away (presumerably during outside storage at Blackpool), the wheel hubs had wooden slats wrapped round them that she could be moved as there were no mainwheel tyres and the props and engines were missing.
I recovered the control surfaces during the school holidays but the fabric was only stuck to the structure with dope (like a Keilkraft model) as I didn’t know how to sew it on and there wasn’t the time or money to do any better for a static restoration. As far as I know the control surfaces have never been recovered since my efforts well over 35 years ago! I don’t remember anyone ever having the time or chance to sort out the remnants of the flaps.
Eventually Bill Gent got the props and wheels from a Channel Airways Heron that was being broken at Southend to make the Drover look presentable but the wheels seem to have gone walkabout again.
The Drover along with the Southend Mitchell both seem to have had a raw deal in preservation and both deserve better futures. This isn’t meant to be a criticism of the efforts at Lasham but sadly they seem to have too many aircraft for a small band of workers to look after.
Sign In
