dark light

eye4wings

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 184 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Blackburn B20 – flap type? #858301
    eye4wings
    Participant

    Thankyou for the information Schneiderman.
    Only the B2 came up on initial search so I have sent them an email.

    Robin

    in reply to: Blackburn B20 – flap type? #858685
    eye4wings
    Participant

    Absolutely!
    Unless landing inverted was in the plan – I believe someone did this with a small biplane a couple of years back – but it is far from common practice!

    Trying to get detail on rare types is not exactly easy. They never have the benefit of such things as pilots’ notes.

    I wonder what happened to the second prototype that was cancelled half way through building… scrapped I suppose.

    Robin

    in reply to: Blackburn B20 – flap type? #858784
    eye4wings
    Participant

    Thanks Richard – sounds like a Fowler flap to me too.
    A bit of a strange description… I thought all types of flaps were ‘camber-changing’ and ‘inboard of the ailerons’… Better than no description though.
    Does Mr Jackson include any photos of the flaps deployed? … because my next decision is going to be to what degree were the flaps intended to increase wing area and to what extent did they droop. I.E. how curved was the track?

    Robin

    in reply to: Blackburn B20 – flap type? #859076
    eye4wings
    Participant

    Thanks for the response Graham.
    The ailerons are Frise, but the flaps have quite a bit more chord under the wing than they do. Unfortunately there seem to be no photos on the web of the B20 with flaps extended.
    If anyone is harbouring a photo of the aircraft with flaps down that would be of great help.

    Robin

    in reply to: Duxford Diary (2015) #865348
    eye4wings
    Participant

    I doubt there is a bulldozer on Earth that could make a dent in that structure – to suggest it might be considered a bit extreme… but my first thought was how cluttered it looked – and with the Blackbird still to shoehorn in.
    But then wherever you look in there or airspace it is almost impossible to get a clear shot of any particular aircraft unobstructed by parts of others, still less a complete walk-around set if one is researching a particular type.
    But that has to be set against the benefits of having as many under cover as possible given the cost of hangarage.
    (Besides, having each one capable of being comprehensively photographable might hurt book sales!?)

    So I have mixed feelings about those that have to spend their lives outside. It is sad to see some in such a state – though some recent repainting work has done a lot of good – but at least you can see them from all angles.

    I’m glad I don’t have to make the decisions!
    Robin

    in reply to: Hunter Crash at Shoreham (First AAIB report released) #902759
    eye4wings
    Participant

    I would never suggest such a thing HP111. The possibilty had not entered my mind. Without rules society would cease to exist and it would be every man for himself. On the other hand if good sense can prevail over the usual over-reaction to things such as have just happened we stand a chance of returning to a freer society.

    I don’t see that suggesting that the ‘failed loop’ (actually a stalled our split S) was not the cause but the effect is exactly nit-picking. It might be viewable as speculation but I bet you have a pretty good idea what the problem was too?!

    It will all calm down anyway within a few days.
    The papers will stop their scare-mongering and the ‘powers that be’ will relax once the pressure is off. Then once the cause is ascertained by the AAIB life will return to some semblance of normality.

    in reply to: Hunter Crash at Shoreham (First AAIB report released) #902928
    eye4wings
    Participant

    The irony is that in this instance the display hadn’t started. Wasn’t this supposed to be his initial introductory straight run?
    If so then what appeared to be an attempted loop (although far too early as it was not in front of the crowd) was actually caused by a problem that had already occurred before he was over the airfield boundary. No rule changes whatsoever would eliminate what happened.
    Is it not true that the manoeuvre we have all seen was unplanned before the show? And for a seasoned display pilot I don’t doubt it was unintended at the time,
    It was the outcome of what went wrong not the cause of it.

    So even if the current rule change for no high-energy manoeuvres had been in place before the accident it could still have happened exactly as it did.

    in reply to: Bugatti 100P First Flight #906573
    eye4wings
    Participant

    A very nice job he made of it too!

    I totally missed that – I should get out (of the workshop) more!

    Robin

    in reply to: Bugatti 100P First Flight #907217
    eye4wings
    Participant

    Nice yes… for that kind of money you’d expect pretty near perfection!

    Robin

    eye4wings
    Participant

    Actually my post was intended to make the point that there can be ‘over the top’ in both directions and it is wise to quietly wait and see what comes of it. Rather like the well-known sign-off line ‘There are two sides to every story – the truth is usually somewhere in between’.

    As for the spiritual aspects I do realise that many of our number resolutely refuse to believe anything that their normal senses can’t detect. I have experienced enough to know that our normal senses aren’t designed to detect everything that is. Even our eyes which we depend on for the majority of our sensory input detect only a very narrow waveband. I would rather keep an open mind than close my eyes to everything that doesn’t conform to my particular world view.

    Robin

    in reply to: Bugatti 100P First Flight #907388
    eye4wings
    Participant

    That is certainly en elegant beast!
    There will be RC models made of that one!

    Couldn’t help thinking that was a somewhat different outcome from the first flight of the Stirling prototype which wrote off the aircraft due to brakes locked on.

    eye4wings
    Participant

    Just looked at one of the reviews:

    “Conspiracy theory nonsense: riddled with factual errors, hearsay, and ignores dead ends to instead conflate them with some other part of “the story” to keep the narrative going. Easier to face facts that there really is no conspiracy, mostly it was just vapourware and wishful thinking!”

    I didn’t realise that this sort of garbage was around. Sadly I can’t erase my annoyance now that I know.

    Know what?

    That reads as precisely the sort of ‘review’ that might be written by someone trying to cover up the conspiracy. Who wrote it, who does he/she have contacts with and what are his/her affiliations?
    A proper investigator would be asking these questions of both sides.

    The fact that the train is supposedly found in an occupied country has no bearing on its importance. The Nazis believed they would conquer the world. Just look at the effort put into the ‘Atlantic wall’ to protect ‘their’ country. Poland was the first new land to be won. The population was just a new source of slaves. This was to be the ‘Thousand year Reich’.

    Some reports are interesting and worth bearing in mind for when other factors come to light. This is probably just one of the more peripheral ones.

    So far as the Big Picture is concerned the SS’s involvement with occult practices seems fairly well-attested and may well have been the reason that the Nazis failed. After all if you are going to trust someone with your life and future you need to know them well enough to know they won’t lead you astray. It may very well have been their quest for worldly power that blinded them to the danger and led them to trust the great liar. During the course of the war there were several major decisions we find hard to understand unless we bring the occult connections into account.

    Robin

    in reply to: Russian TSR2? #918274
    eye4wings
    Participant

    AHA! I was wondering how the USA could be involved in the story. Somewhat less political chicanery in this instance than we have come to expect though.

    in reply to: Ghost of a Spitfire Pilot… #919628
    eye4wings
    Participant

    I don’t disbelieve in ghosts – particularly since my wife and I saw the same man in broad daylight – so I watched the videos. Did YOU see anything? I didn’t. Not a ‘figure’ in anything, drab or still less RAF blue. So where the idea that there was a Spitfire pilot (could you tell the difference between that and a Hurricane pilot for instance?) came from I can only guess.

    Perhaps the clue was hidden in the text somewhere (that I didn’t read)… perhaps you have to be ‘on’ something and there at the time?

    Robin

    in reply to: Tiger Moths #923551
    eye4wings
    Participant

    I will also be at Woburn. May I suggest that we have a “mini forum” meet and greet at 1030 to 11 AM at the club enclosure entrance – on the “public” side? I will be wearing a black blazer and a Boater with maroon hatband.

    Both days Stan?
    I will be making my decision much closer to the time and dependant on the weather forecast!

    Robin

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 184 total)