This aircraft now belongs to the Solent Sky Museum at Southampton and is available for hire as a static display item, I have seen it at various venues in the south including the Goodwood Revival motor race meeting.
See http://www.spitfireonline.co.uk/ look under the heading ‘ABOUT THE MUSEUM’.

In the ‘FIRE BOMBERS’ book in the OSPREY COLOUR SERIES it has a pic of a Canadian CL215 that had to land in a field near Chino airport when the u/c melfunctioned. Left a shallow groove and suffered little damage, flying again soon after.

I believe BOAC did try and support British industry, it did order the Hermes and I have read that that had huge problems with performance and support.
The York, Halton and Lancastrian were all used immediately post war probably just because they were available, although unsuitable in real terms.
The Tudor could have been a winner but again fell short on payload range I believe.
The Comet and Concorde were real steps into the unknown and any operator was brave to pioneer their use. The Brittania too to a lesser extent.
That only leaves the VC10 which was/still is a good aircraft. I wonder what the operating cost comparison was for it and the 707/DC8.

So which one was flying over Alton, Hampshire on the 1st of Feb, definately a 2 bladed WOP WOP WOP UH1, definately not a Griffon which we see a lot of round here.
Or was it a visitor from abroad.

Saw one over the western outskirts of Sydney only a couple of days ago. I believe it lives at Hoxton Park, and has a Lycoming rather than the original Wankel engine. Strange noise, looked up, there it was!

Tim

I didnt think any were Wankel powered.

I’m still interested in any pictures of Spitfires as glider tugs, all I have is a grainy photo of the towing attchment on the tailwheel.

I have a copy of an Aerospace artical published in 1979, its the report of a lecture given by Dr K G Wilkinson titled the Development of Military Assault Gliders. It includes a picture of a Spitfire tail wheel, with a glider towing attachment fitted. Unfortunately it shows only a small amount of the bottom of the rudder and rear fuselage. Caption is as follows:-

The ‘hasty hitch’ towing attachment fitted to a Spitfire tailwheel was designed to enable a Hotspur glider to be towed. Later experiments were done with a Spitfire towing the Me 163 rocket fighter, perhaps with a more substantial attachment.

Within the text it says:- We thought it would be useful for fighter squadrons if we gave them a Hotspur and a ‘Hasty Hitch’ so they could tow their own front line maintenance support with them when they moved. I doubt if it was ever used.

The picture is credited to the RAE.

I disagree with the view that the Hurricanes tubular construction was easier to repair in the field. I accept that it may have been more rugged and able to withstand rough treatment better than a aluminium stressed skin structure, and It also allowed better internal access for repairs, but it did concentrate its structural load paths in those critical tubes.
On the other hand the stressed skin structure carries the loads in a very different way, ie through the skin, stringers and longerons. Punch a big hole in it and it stays together. Many examples of B17 damage show this. also field type repairs will consist of pop riveted patches or for bigger repairs solid riveted insert repairs, all simple stuff with tin snips, pop pliers, a drill and a hammer. Repair patches can be cut from another airframe in time of need in the same way.
A good example is “FLACK BAIT” the B26 in the Air and Space museum, thats covered in repaired holes all just pop rivetted scab patches.
I think the Hurricane fuselage construction method was just a progression from the Hart/Fury style and was on its way out with the Typhoon/Tempest and gone by the time the Sea Fury came along.