Proctor VH-AHYGooday all
You can get it from http://www.classiccockpits.com/
here is a small frame grab from the video (Hope Rick doesn’t mind). I am not joking, if you like the Lancaster then you will enjoy this video. I have viewed all of Rick’s aviation videos and greatly enjoyed them all. They are very well done.
Proctor VH-AHYSpeaking of Lancasters, I just watched a recently-released DVD produced by Rick Searle on the Canadian Warplane Heritiage Museum Lancaster.
Its a great DVD and flights were specially flown and filmed for the DVD. Great run-thru the cockpit instrumentation and the engine startup checks and before flights. Some great air-to-air shots and in-the-air views within the cockpit, pre-landing checks etc.
Worth a watch if you can get hold of a copy
cheers
Proctor VH-AHYWe have them operating at our airfield (Watts Bridge, Queensland)most weekends, and the old Bensons still get regularly trotted out – personally I find them very boring and noisy.
cheers
Proctor VH-AHYPolished aeroplanes fly faster and by quite a few knots. Painted aeroplanes are a lot heaver as well.
Proctor VH-AHYAll
Since Mike did a show and tell, I thought I would put up a couple of recent images of my rebuild project down here in the Great Land Down Under. I put the one of the floor reinforcement in because I thought it was interesting. One more bay of floor to be built yet. I have been working on this project for quite a while (years and years) and these is not much about proctor construction in the fuselage, rudder, fin, tailplane, elevators and centre section I am not familiar with. Outer wing panels are still a black hole in my knowledge.
I really need a copies of the drawings for the fuselage for the first formers, ie drawing nos KF366,KF367,KF368,KF369,KF370 so if there is any proctor lovers out there with copies of those drawings, it would greatly help me get my project finished, I am pretty sure there is someone out there with these drawings.
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYGooday all
What about the wing root assembly and the corresponding castings on the fuselage and the centre section. Can Tiger Moth parts be used there?
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYI am sure you know about the experimental category in Australia. Any Gipsy Moths built would be done under that, they would not be type-certified aeroplanes. They would not be DH Gipsy Moths, they would be replicas, very close replicas
That gets around a lot of things, paperwork wise, and allows that they could be maintained by the builder.
I have been told and others may be able to confirm this, that in a wooden Gipsy Moth the fittings are made out of flat metal plate.
If so that is a dead sitter for lazer cutting of the fittings.
I was thinking powered by a converted Gipsy Major, though becoming harder to get, there is still enough around. Lang Kidby had one converted for the Avro Avian that he flew from England to Australia a while back.
Another benefit if the project were to have engine other than a Gipsy would be that it could serve to sort out a suitable replacement engine for Tiger Moths when (and it is when and not if) Gipsy Majors become difficult to maintain (ie we run out of heads and valves and crankshafts)
cheers
Ross
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYActually I,m amazed the RAAF funded Museum at Point Cook still doesn,t have a P40 or Spitfire in it,s stables.Seeing they and the Boomerang saw much more service than the Mustang.
Old Spitty
Ask your self this question, “where did these aeroplanes make their biggest contribution to the defence of Australia. I suggest it in the NT and WA.
Thus I suggest the best place to display them would be in an annex of the RAAF Museum in Darwin, NT.
Likewise if you were going to display an F111 then I suggest the best place would be in an annex of the RAAF museum in S.E Queensland, likely at Ipswich (Amberley being part of the city of Ipswich).
I recently went to the RAAF Museum at Point Cook. Nice display and all, however I don’t think many of the larger display items had any historical connection with Pt Cook, save the RAAF Museum is located there.
It’s difficult to get your head around a concept of “Big is not better” or “Having them located in one place is better than in distributed annexes”
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYRoss,
I do agree with a distributed National Collection and even a Campus approach to a National Aviation Museum outcome given the size of Australia and the storys best told in their original locations and settings, but I’m sorry but I dont see anything obvious about the Gold Coast as “the” obvious choice at all for a single display location?
To me a single large collection in one place that just caters to the tourist market would just be tacky. The Gold Coast is a tacky place that caters to toursists – see the connection
Re the Brisbane Line comment, the Brisbane Line went from Brisbane to Adelaide, all south of that would be fought for, all above (ie 3/4 of Australia would be allowed to be taken by the Nips (Japs).
What I was aluding to was that there is the whole of Australia to consider not just SE Queensland, NSW and VIC.
I promote Queensland because really it is the best part of Australia and also because for years Victorians and NSW’ers used to say go to QLD and wind your watch back 100 years.
As I identified and you have expanded, the very early days of aviation in Australia were closely identified with Victoria as was the CAC/GAF.
There is plenty of scope within each state to play to their strengths with regards to their aviation history.
The real shame is that governments seem to respond to lobbying and pressure groups and thus “someday” we are likely to see a large single museum stuck somewhere that pleases one lobby group that ignores the others.
The decentralised approach is the one that would provide the best overall outcome, however it is difficult for governments to deal with many groups. We need a lobby group that supports this proposal.
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYAs far as a NAC, the problem remains that previous concepts seem to be based around the having in in one place, and it is usually suggested that it be in Canberra or Melbourne.
My suggestion is that we have a precinct of the museum in each state. I sometimes wonder if there are traces of the old ‘Brisbane Line” mentality alive and well and I think my concept would cater best for the preservation of Australia’s aviation History.
As an example, here in Queensland, we could focus on Smithy (we already have the Southern Cross, Bert Hinkler, QANTAS, and of course the RAAF in connections with the operations from Queensland into New Guinea and the Battle of the Coral Sea during WW2. We had a heavy presence of the US air forces here in Queensland during WW2
I imagine that the Victorians could focus on the very early days of aviation, the RAAF at Point Cook and the CAC at Fisherman’s bend.
NSW would have amongst other things, the operations of De Havilland at Mascott.
I think each state has its “list” of aviation actievements and these would provide the theme for each precinct of the one National Museum. I guess that Canberra would be hard pushed to come up with much, but then what’s new about that.
If we are just going to have a bunch of statics on display in one place to act as a tourist attraction, then I guess that the Gold Coast is the obvious choice for a location. Having said that I am aware of a lot of the comments recently posted on another thread on this forum about the goings on in one of the major British museums.
The QANTAS founders museum at Longreach is a good example of what I am advocating. It is a specialist museum focused on QANTAS and what a great climate to store aircraft in the open.
By the way in 1992 I did a re-enactment flight of QANTAS’s first mail run and as part of that hangared my Tiger Moth overnight in the original QANTAS hangar at Longreach – what a moment and what a thrill, I remember standing in the hangar and imagining what had happened in there all those years ago.
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYShame about the spelling mistake Peter Carrot
Proctor VH-AHYBattle
I have nothing against statics, save I am not interested in them other than as a source of a future rebuild-to-flying project. Obviously I am not talking about the BIG aeroplanes rather the smaller end of the market.
I think you need to understand that to rebuild an aeroplane from a pile of junk to a a flyable aeroplane takes years and costs A$100,000’s.
To overhaul a Gipsy Queen engine is likely to cost over A$50,000.
Thus if you are going to go to all that effort, then you might-as-well rebuild it to flying.
As an example think of the aeroplanes that used to be on poles at the front of RAAF bases and the like that have been taken down and are now rebuilt to flying.
Matt is a mate of mine and I first visited his parents house in the 1970’s when as you say he was going to rebuild the Boomerang to static. We managed to show him that he could do it to flying. In the 1970’s in Australia there was an attitude that old aeroplanes shouldn’t fly, so to rebuild an old aeroplane to flying was seen as near impossible (circa 1975) by the late 1970’s that attitude had changed thanks largely to groups like the SAAA-VAS, QVAG and AAAA.
As an example my Tiger moth had never been on the civil register and when I purchased it I was told by many “You won’t be able to register it!” by 1982 it was on the register, no problems.
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYMark
Strange you should mention that, I did a cut and paste on your email and sent it to the QVAG president, Frank Ragonese with the suggestion that it might serve as the basis for an article in Australian Vintage Aeroplane News. I was hoping that one of them may extend your list by adding the Queensland/Northern NSW ones.
Yes there are quite a number of interesting and active rebuild projects, I don’t follow ones that are to static, but among the rebuild-to-flying a recent one from memory is the DH Moth Minor, but as you say its a shame more is not forthcoming. I just had a quick look at their web site http://www.qvag.org.au and its a bit basic.
Frank Ragonese is only new to the job as President (but has been a very long term QVAG/AFM member). New broom so we may see some changes.
Re your comment about progress and rebuilding and the finished product – I agree. I have taken hundreds of photos plus high-res video (1920 x 1080) of my rebuilding project and have been compiling a DVD as I do. It’s just a personal thing to remind me of the rebuild project and what it looked like over time.
Being a rebuilder means that you really need to focus on your project (assuming you have a day job as well), maybe that explains why most rebuilders seem to ignore the “publishing the story as it goes” aspect. I have posted the odd image of my project in this BB, but I think I have reached the image limit. I do exchange images of my project with some people in NZ and England who are also rebuilding Proctors.
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYMark
Thanks, that’s an impressive list of aeroplanes that one day will grace the skies again. I hope they don’t end up overseas (since the $A has dropped).
I had heard of the Cadets, are they under active restoration?
I don’t have such a list for up here in Qld/Northern NSW
cheers
Ross
Proctor VH-AHYI have a book (unpublished) written by Jim Bigelow canned “From where it all began” – a collection of “memories and Experiences” relating to ex-members of 12 SQN RAAF 1939 – 1945
You guessed it, they flew Hawker Demons, Avro Ansens, Wirraways, Vultee Vengeances and B24 Liberators.
Its about 25cm thick and has lots of interesting stories about flying the Vengeance. The contributors to the book are from members of the squadron back then and cover all the musterings.
One article tells of handing over a gaggle of Vengeances in Kalgoorlie, WA and the aircraft remained there until the end of the war when they were sold complete for 6 pound each
Great Book, shame it will never be published.
cheers
Ross
Sign In
