dark light

JT442

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 870 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Gnat XM691 #1072045
    JT442
    Participant

    In my very limited archive, I can’t find any reference to it after 1964 at Farnborough, and since it was a prototype I would highly doubt it ever served anywhere except CFS during trials and evaluation.

    Since It was destroyed at Shepperton in 1969 one would have to assume that it was surplus to requirements at least a couple of years before that. Best guess from the wrong side of the Tyne is that DC would have bought it directly from Folland, stripped it and sold what was left to Shepperton.

    DC’s archives would be the best source – hopefully he kept a receipt!

    in reply to: Gnat XM691 #1072237
    JT442
    Participant

    It was the T.1 Prototype: http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/gnat/history.php

    Appeared at Farnborough in 1959 and 62:
    http://www.farnboroughspotters.com/59.html
    http://www.farnboroughspotters.com/62.html

    From http://www.militaryairshows.co.uk/follandgnat.htm and which may be of extreme interest to you….
    Cost also affected the engine unit and de-rated Orpheus BOR.4.JK100 4,230 lb-st was fitted powering the FO.144 prototype aircraft for the first flight from Chilbolton on the 31st August, 1959, again with Sqn. Leader A. A. Tennant at the controls bearing the registration XM691.
    XM691 was just one from fourteen aircraft that had been built following finalisation of the design to spec T.185. For further production to continue Folland aircraft had to join forces with Hawker Siddeley as the government favoured larger organisations to undertake large scale manufacture.

    UK Serials has this:

    f/f 31/08/1959, blown up Shepperton Studios 07/1969

    http://www.ukserials.com/

    From what I can gather, Shepperton Studios made 27 films in 1969, some of them are listed below. Its possible the aircraft was destroyed for a production from 1970 too… (I *think* that these are completion dates rather than general release dates…)

    Anne of the Thousand Days (1969)
    Cromwell (1969)
    Every Home Should Have One (1969)
    The Promise (1969)
    A Severed Head (1969)
    The Three Sisters (1969)
    When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth (1969)
    Battle of Britain (1969)
    The Body Stealers (1969)
    The Last Grenade (1969) … this one is a ‘modern image’ war film, so perhaps this is a lightly candidate! Anyone seen the film?
    The Oblong Box (1969)
    The Reckoning (1969)
    The Smashing Bird I Used to Know (1969)

    in reply to: General Discussion #284857
    JT442
    Participant

    I wonder just how many public sector workers – you know the type: teacher/nurse/refuse collector (ie. not middle and upper management) can afford to learn to fly and run aeroplanes?… in comparison to the equivalent jobs in the private sector 😀

    In all seriousness, I’m public sector, I don’t have any association with a union, and therefore don’t strike. I do not pay into a pension fund for two reasons – I can’t afford to put £200/month into a pot, and secondly by the time I hit 67 – 70 years old, the retirement age will have exceeded my ability to stay alive. I get a good wage for the 800 ish hours I have in contact with my students, but that does not take into account the preparation time at home. I took a huge pay cut when I moved from private to public. I did find Mr. Clarkson’s comments funny and watched as they were blown out of proportion by the media.

    In a few years time, there will be a dramatic increase in the number of deaths at work….

    in reply to: Jed #1868815
    JT442
    Participant

    I wonder just how many public sector workers – you know the type: teacher/nurse/refuse collector (ie. not middle and upper management) can afford to learn to fly and run aeroplanes?… in comparison to the equivalent jobs in the private sector 😀

    In all seriousness, I’m public sector, I don’t have any association with a union, and therefore don’t strike. I do not pay into a pension fund for two reasons – I can’t afford to put £200/month into a pot, and secondly by the time I hit 67 – 70 years old, the retirement age will have exceeded my ability to stay alive. I get a good wage for the 800 ish hours I have in contact with my students, but that does not take into account the preparation time at home. I took a huge pay cut when I moved from private to public. I did find Mr. Clarkson’s comments funny and watched as they were blown out of proportion by the media.

    In a few years time, there will be a dramatic increase in the number of deaths at work….

    in reply to: East Fortune Vulcan: victim of a typo or a chainsaw?!! #1076225
    JT442
    Participant

    Blue – that’s nothing! In a previous article about said Hemp aircraft, the same magazine spelt MY name wrong! Because it was written in black and white in an international magazine, which is free from all errors, I actually had to change my name by Deed poll to match the ‘error’.

    Regards,

    John S[[;rhstyj. 😀

    in reply to: Why Inverted Engines? #1079123
    JT442
    Participant

    With an inverted engine, the crankshaft is higher off the ground, and so a bigger propeller can be fitted…. lower centre of Gravity, better visbility, on Vee engines the oil sump can be fitted between the banks of cylinders.

    Carbs, superchargers, pumps, etc seem to usually be mounted behind the engine rather than increasing the cross section.

    in reply to: First underwing pressure re-fueling? #1080155
    JT442
    Participant

    Underwing refuelling seems to be an Americanism for any kind of pressure refuelling…. I think it’s fair to say the Comet was the first with pressure re-fuel points actually under the wings, and as well as Bruce’s FW190, we could be looking at beating a 1938 Modified HP Harrow for the first aircraft pressure refuelling system…….

    After all that research, I need a lie down. (I’ll stop taking over now 😉

    in reply to: First underwing pressure re-fueling? #1080233
    JT442
    Participant

    http://b377.ovi.ch/brochures/esso/

    gravity…… I can’t think of any piston / AVGAS aircraft which used pressure refuelling….

    B47 – Pressure. First flight 1947, In service date 1951 – so that beats the comet… http://schenectadystore.frontex.com/transportation_other_g51-at_a_united_states_air_force_base_at_fairford_gloucetershire_england_a_ground_crew_refuels_a_boeing_b47_stratojet_bomber._plane_is_powered_by_six_ge_j47_jet_engines._p8351.html

    in reply to: First underwing pressure re-fueling? #1080605
    JT442
    Participant

    Well the 1-11 used a pressure refuel point at the forward edge of the wing root – much easier to get to than Boeing’s under wing access. I would imagine the 707 has underwing refuelling rather than fuselage mounted.

    DH Comet appears to have underwing refuelling too: http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/online-exhibitions/dehavilland/images.cfm?PageNum_rsDeHavilland=6

    Swift and Hunter were the first RAF fighters to use pressure re-fuelling http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1954/1954%20-%200318.html so under-wing fuelling would be later than that. My guess is Comet has another first… 😀 In the same article it refers to a HP Harrow having a Refuelling Valve (ie. pressure refuelling) in 1938, BUT chances are, this would be upper wing mounted.

    in reply to: Avro 707 Relic #1080750
    JT442
    Participant

    Congratulations and thanks are in order – very few people donate their relics to museums these days and it takes a true enthusiast to place an object with an appropriate collection rather than resort to making a quick buck from e-bay (other internet auction sites are available). I am impressed, and I only wish more people could be like you. So congratulations for making the right choice and helping a museum increase its display potential, and thank you for restoring my faith in humanity. (2nd time this week this has happened!)

    in reply to: Anyone need any BAC 111 seats?! #1082370
    JT442
    Participant

    What condition are they in, and how many? Left hand? Right hand? Both?….

    in reply to: Free to a good home! #1082373
    JT442
    Participant

    I’d like to make a claim on behalf of NEAM, IF you could wait 24 hours so I can confirm that we could collect it…. It would make a fine display next to the comet 4 nose section….

    in reply to: Astraeus Airlines RIP #559902
    JT442
    Participant

    Quite so! It seems that Mr. Dickinson could be in a position to keep Ed Force One going …. http://uk.news.yahoo.com/iron-maiden-singer-ill-save-ailing-airline-150959528.html

    in reply to: And Now For Something Completely Different Thread Mk2 #1087415
    JT442
    Participant

    These are more commonly seen with a probe, but this one is pre-probe…..

    in reply to: F-14 VS Tornado F3 #2331997
    JT442
    Participant

    As stand-off platforms, it would be down to which missile had the better range and accuracy, so I’d put a long distance stand-off to a win in favour of the F14.

    In close quarters, the F14 was a bit more sprightly, so again, whilst it would be close, the F-14 would most likely come out on top.

    Regards, ex-F3 engineer

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 870 total)