Dear Atomic Sheep – Mate, I think you need a really strong dose of reality pills. The team behind the DH 88 was at the top of its game and these aircraft were some of the cutting edge technology of their day. You say you are going to recreate one of these aircraft, with a glass cockpit and a tv screen so you can see where you are going when landing. I suggest that if you want a DH 88 that badly, go and buy that one in the States, or have the bloke make one for you – it will be far cheaper than what your project is going to cost and will have a far better chance of coming to fruition.
MT = Mechanical Transport.
The ramp might also be used for loading vehicles etc onto flatbed vehicles which are not low-loaders.
Beau: CAA? Do tell us more.
The Echo’s a bit late with its April Fool’s Day jape this year!!!
Bruce: The de Havilland data is correct for the civil types quoted, believe me. However, perhaps you have identified a difference in drawing nomeclature used to distinguish a military type from a civil type – I have no knowledge of the military drawing sequence.
One slight correction – for civil types after 100, the last one or two digits were used in the drawing/part number, not the whole of the type number, eg:
4 – Dove
6 – Comet
14 – Heron
21 – Trident
25 – 125
For those still frothing at the mouth, you may wish to know that the 31 March 2008 amendment to CAP 747 makes the Flug Werke 190 an Annex II or non-EASA aircraft. That means it is subject to UK national legislation if certificated here. In turn, that means that the CAA can impose any rules it likes from its veritable mountain of paperwork, irrespective of the status of certification of the type in any other country. Whilst the aircraft can still be granted a UK Permit to Fly, there might be some hoops to jump through to prove to the satisfaction of the CAA that the aircraft is airworthy. They always look very, very closely at the first aircraft of a type when presented for certification in the UK.
Before everyone starts frothing at the mouth, check out Articles 11 and 12 (from memory) which regulate the way the CAA can issue a Permit to Fly to non-EASA and EASA aircraft types.
glapinc is Great Lakes Plastic and they make a windscreen for the Canadian Chippie. As John is asking about comparison with theUK-built part number, I suspect that he and others are looking for a new screen for an ex-RAF model.
This thread has got me confused! The title of the thread and the newspaper report refer to the mast on Postland Road, Crowland, locally known as “Radar Corner”. This is the mast which has been demolished – but it is not the mast which is pictured in the first post on this thread. Anyone confirm where this location is?
Turning to the use of the Crowland mast, it was a telecommunications relay mast and not radar. It was built in the mid 50s I believe and was part of a microwave relay chain for the USAF. Other locations in Lincs with a similar role were at Kirton-in-Lindsey, Elsham Wolds and Spitalgate. The Spitalgate mast was still there last year but the Kirton-in-Lindsey mast was demolished appprox five years ago. Not sure about the Elsham mast.
After the USAF stopped using them their aerials were removed and 10-15 years ago the Crowland mast formed a small part of the Uniter/Boxer network. Presumably because of the retrenchment of the RAF the mast was no longer needed. As is happening on airfields, where there is something not being used and it is a risk to ‘elf & safety’ it is getting demolished.
That mast has been a landmark on my journeys from Lincolnshire to the south. Bye bye mast.
DH Support have been asked this question before. The answer was that they don’t have any design data on the Canadian Chippie so cannot say if there are any differences. Given all the other differences between the two types of Chippie, it is possible that the UK variant has a different windscreen, perhaps because AP 970 at the time had more rigorous requirements to protect against birdstrike penetration.
The problem here is that to dig up ‘new’ aggregate out of a quarry the (expletives dleted) Government impose a tax on every ton that is dug up – I think it might now be £10 or more per ton. Digging up and crushing concrete runways is seen as restoring ‘brownfield’ sites and does not attract this tax. Crushed concrete is therefore much cheaper than quarried gravel. Also, digging up the concrete paves the way (sorry for that) for lots of new houses to be built all over the site of an old airfield. In fact, the crushed concrete could be used on site in the construction of the new roads, houses etc, saving thousands of lorry loads being brought in – how green is that? At present the concrete crusher is quite quickly munching its way across West Raynham, although the intent here is to recover the land for agricultural use. We have to face it that with the way this country is going, old airfields will soon be as dead as the Dodo.
Mission Springs should read MISSON. Its not far from Finningley and is known as Jackson’s ‘Rocket Site’, where they store and sell ex-military vehicles – you can see loads in the satellite pic.
Come on VX, loosen up! At least you will now be able to sleep easy because you will be able to legally use parts from the usual sources that would immediately invalidate your current CofA if the CAA took any notice of them!
‘PKN was trailered out of Skegness to new owners at Felthorpe, where it met its fate in the arson attack there a few years ago. Sad end to a well-known and much liked aircraft.
MOTHS AT BOSTON
Simon: The Hornet was G-ADKK, which Cliff bought as a flyer. Your Dad and the team maintained it and also rebuilt Leopard Moth G-ACUS from a heap of junk to flying condition. As this thread has shown, your Dad and the team were renowned for the fantastic condition of the Austers, which I remember winning several prizes over the years at the PFA Rally, Sywell. I also remember your Grandfather, Bill, who if I remember correctly, was the Operations Manager for Lincs Aerial. Will send you a PM.