Do the CAF still operate two C46’s ? Always liked that plane.

Someone asked the same question over on WIX http://www.warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=54648 for the answer.
And the belly landing incident with the C46 has only just happened, the overloaded C47 was two years ago.

Richard

The low wing monoplane could be a Mauboussin M.123 or another one of a long line of similar aircraft built by this manufacturer numbered M.120 to M.129.

Richard

Thanks Mothminor, lovely record of what was everyday live in 1971. I always thought the Vanguard was a sensible aircraft that did a good job without any fuss.
I did a bit of searching on some of the other clips on the same archive site and one listed as ,Catapult Launch Tests, shows the prototype DH110/Sea Vixen and a Scimitar doing take off’s and landings on a carrier but some of the take off’s appear to be done without catapult. I didnt realise a jet of that vintage (1955) could do that. http://ssa.nls.uk/film/6310

Richard

DH Heron?

So if the Heron is not airworthy that means we only have a three engined Trislander to fly the UK built piston flag, and the four engined piston title passes to the CWH Lanc.
The situation is no better with the our engined turbine fleet, none left that I can think of, Oz Belfast possibly the last.
Fingers crossed that the fire damage can be repaired.

Richard

I know its thread drift but the Boscombe Down report on Halifax rudder stalling is interesting reading http://www.jp137.com/lts/dishax.pdf unfortunately in nearly every case the crews were unable to leave the aircraft due to the violence of the spin. Was LK846 a casualty of this problem?

Richard

Peter
I concur with Air Min that this is a component data plate. The TYPE No. 683 is obviously the Avro type number for the Lancaster. What puzzles me is that the component part number does not appear on the plate just the serial number which would be a serial for that particular component, the small 2 at the top of the plate may mean that an adjacent plate had all the p/n data on it.. The mod plate looks as if it reflects the mods incorporated when the component was built, it would be difficult (without removing the plate)to stamp any new mod numbers so they were often written on by hand using a vibro etcher, just those incorporated during build being stamped.
Mods could be very minor changes in build such as one rivet hole being in a different position or different paint finish.
Richard

Tail volume demands it.

Mossie is very difficult to fly under Vmca speed ( on one engine ) which was a very high number ( 175 kts IAS ).

http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-473377.html

Extented wings possibly needed 200 kts Vmca.

Is that 200 kts just a quess on your part, the Mk XV’s were lightened airframes operating at lower weights that many other Mosquito variants, therefore in a single engine situation less power would have been needed on the remaining engine, so less rudder load.