David EyreThere is some good info about the development of the A-7 at these links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-7_Corsair_II
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/a-7.htm
David EyreHi All,
There are a number of forum topics regarding this aircraft and its long-running rebuild to flying condition.
This Spitfire is special to me, as I sat in its cockpit, and had my photo taken with it, when it was in the Rolls-Royce hangar at East Midlands Airport in the 1970s/early 1980s.
I emailed the Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust to ask for an update on progress, and received this reply:
“David, the aeroplane is at least a year from completion.The wings should be delivered in the next few weeks; engine is completed and John Hart and the team are working on the airframe currently.
In hindsight, the programme was optimistic – the same team operate the Mk 19. Contact me again in, say, 6 month’s time for an update.”
David EyreAnyone noticed the A40-002 being marked as NAVY and A40-003 as ARMY? Are there any differences in versions? Can the helicopters eventually be swapped from one service to another one in case of urgency?
All of the 46 MRH90s on order for Australia are to be based on the German Tactical Transport Helicopter (TTH) version of the NH90, not the NFH version. They will replace Australia’s Army S-70A-9 Blackhawks and Navy Westland Sea King Mk.50.
There’s a possibility that even more NH90s may be ordered to replace the Navy S-70B-2 Seahawks, although the version may be different.
NavyMatters website states:
“A senior source at NHIndustries said: “We can play with features taken from the TTH and NFH variants to put together a customer-optimised configuration.” Australia’s MRH90 variant is based on the German Army’s TTH version, with slight variations such as electrically-folding main rotor blades and extensive navalisation features, including emergency flotation kits.”
The Australian Navy NavyNews website stated in a press release:
“The MRH 90, based on the German Tactical Transport Helicopter version of the NH Industries NH 90 aircraft, will provide the airmobile, maritime support and special operations roles for the ADF,” MAJ Gillard said.
“The joint operation of this fleet by Army and Navy will realise substantial efficiencies across the fundamental inputs to capability and allow greater flexibility to be achieved by that mature capability.
“Using a common platform will allow Navy to achieve a greater MSH [Maritime Support Helicopter] presence at sea for longer periods than presently attained.
“The NH 90 program originally began as a maritime helicopter project and a significant level of marinisation has been incorporated into the aircraft design.
This will benefit the maritime support role, but also the increasing amphibious emphasis to be placed on Army with the introduction into service of the Future Amphibious Transport ships.”
He said the in-service date for the MRH 90 capability would be December 17, 2007.
Initial deliveries would support a training capability in Townsville, followed by aircraft allocation to 817 SQN to provide an interim operational MSH capability by the end of 2010.”
David EyreThe BAe 146 is still flying, and has been converted to an aerial laboratory.
Here are some photos of the BAe 146 prototype in current guise as the BAe 146-301ARA (Atmospheric Research Aircraft):
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=G-LUXE&distinct_entry=true
David EyreTarget,
I can’t find any photos of the MRH-90s arriving, but there are some nice air-to-air photos of them during flight testing in France here:
http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2007/Nov/20071115/index.htm
They arrived on 13 November 2007 at Brisbane aboard An-124 UR-82072 of Antonov Design Bureau. It arrived from France via the Maldives.
It departed to Perth on 14 November using callsign “ADB870F”, to pick up some mining equipment.
David EyreI have read your post and hope to contribute some knowledge. I am the sales manager for Allaero and can confirm that we nolonger own ZF130 – the last I heard about the airframe is that it is now in club (I don’t know which one) in Camden.
I know this is going a little off-topic, but I did some searching regarding ZF130. Some websites say it was WFU at Farnborough, then broken up. Another site says that the fuselage went to Hanningfield Metals. Another site says the fuselage is now at Electroworkz Night Club at 7 Torrens Rd, Islington.
Can anyone confirm where it actually is, and where the cockpit section went?
David EyreThere’s a comprehensive discussion about putting a Mosquito back in the air here:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=74426
I would love to see a Mossie flying with the BBMF. As one of the most significant aircraft of WW2, it would definitely be worthy of funding grants/sponsorship.
David EyreCould you specify which version of the HS125 you’re referring to?
You could try asking one of the museums which have early HS125 models to take photos of the bits you need, or ask them if you can gain cockpit access to take photos yourself. EG:
G-ARYA HS125 Prototype – De Havilland Aircraft Heritage Centre
G-ARYC HS125-1 – De Havilland Aircraft Heritage Centre
G-ASSM HS125-1/522 – Science Museum, London
G-ATPD HS125-1B/522 – Bournemouth Aviation Museum
G-ARYB HS125-1 – Midland Air Museum, Coventry
ZF130 HS125-600B – All Aero Ltd, Crawley
David EyreHi There,
I’m an ex-Pom, living in Perth, Western Australia.
David EyreNixe shots! Love the paint job with the engine showing. Whose A/C was that? Been watching the races on the TV, don’t recall seeing that one, at least not up close.
Chris,
That is N24KC, Zivko Edge 540 used by Frank Versteegh. It was Steve Jones’ aircraft last year, and had a similar paint scheme then.
If you want a full list of participating aircraft, check this link:
http://jetspotter.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7397&start=45&sid=d61006092294d6df7b021345f0acfc3b
David EyreIt would great to see – and especially to hear – a Vickers Viscount in the air. Those four Rolls-Royce Darts make a great sound!
It could generate its own revenue from passenger charters as well as display work.
David EyreProctor Mark 1 VH-AUC at the Australian National Aviation Museum at Moorabbin
Other Percivals in Australia include:
D3 Gull Six G-AERD – static display – National Museum of Australia
P44 Proctor Mark 1 VH-FEP – static display – National Museum of Australia
P44 Proctor Mark 1 VH-AUC – static display – (Moorabbin as above)
P44 Proctor Mark 11 VH-AVG – static display – Central Aust Aviation Museum
P44 Proctor Mark 111 VH-BQR – static display – WestAust Heritage Centre
P44 Proctor Mark V VH-BCM – static display – Camden Museum of Aviation
EP9 VH-DAV – static display(fuse) -Lincoln Nitshke CollectionAirworthy/ under restoration
D2 Gull IV VH-UTP Flying Donald Johnston
D3 Gull Six VH-CCM Flying Ken Holdsworth
EP9 VH-DAI Flying Todd Miller
P44 Proctor Mark 1 VH-AHY project Ross Steinhouse
P44 Proctor Mark 1 VH-UXS (formerly VH-DUL) project Maurice Rolfe
Vega Gull II VH-ACA/BQA project Leigh GilesMark 11 Proctor VH-SCC and Mark 111 VH-AHR have apparantly left Australia for rebuild overseas
All a fitting tribute to Edgar Percival, an aussie born in Albury.
Regards
Mark Pilkington
Hi Mark,
Not to be too picky, but your list has the wrong model numbers for the Proctors. Correct model numbers are:
P.28 Proctor I
P.30 Proctor II
P.34 Proctor III
P.31 Proctor IV
P.44 Proctor V
Also, the museum here in Bull Creek, Western Australia is actually called the Aviation Heritage Museum (run by the RAAF Association of WA), and not “WestAust Heritage Centre”. Here’s their website (note – it needs updating, as aircraft collection has changed):
http://www.raafawa.org.au/wa/museum/
Regards,
David
David EyreVH-BQR Percival P-34 Proctor III (cn K.392), at the Aviation Heritage Museum, Bull Creek, Western Australia:
David EyreNot sure whether this is the wreck which you are referring to:
http://kimberleycruising.com.au/Excursions/DC3wreck.htm
David EyreI used the Canon 75-300 non-IS lens for the last 10 years.
All of my photography is done hand-held, as I find a tripod too restrictive to use and carry everywhere. I have a pretty steady hand, but decided that Image Stabilisation would increase the number of “keepers”. A secondary requirement was a lens that was easy to carry when walking long distances and easy to hold when taking a photo. Cost was my other consideration. I live in Australia, so heat haze is a problem in hotter months, and can make a longer focal length useless to me.
I looked at three lenses for my aviation photography:
In the end, I bought the Canon 70-300mm IS (not-DO).
Sigma 50-500mm (“Bigma”) – has no IS, is also a large, heavy lens, and most owners say that it is not great in dull lighting conditions. On the plus side, it has excellent zoom range and gives quite sharp photos, provided you have a steady hand.
Canon 100-400L IS – also a large, heavy lens, but not as bad as the Bigma in this regard. Expensive. On the plus side it has IS, but this lens has not been updated by Canon, so the IS and glass technology is not cutting edge. It is still very popular amongst aviation photographers.
Canon 70-300mm IS – I chose this as it has the latest IS, has good reviews on photography websites for its sharpness, and is very easy to carry around and hold. It is also cheaper than the Sigma 50-500, and especially the Canon 100-400L. The photography websites recommend the non-DO version, as although the DO version is more compact, it is more expensive, and produces photos that are only equivalent to (or worse than) the non-DO version.
I have found the IS to be very useful when taking static photos at a distance or in low-light, and especially for aircraft in flight. I have many more keepers now than I used to. It fits easily in my camera bag with my other lens and gear, and is not heavy or cumbersome to handle. It also doesn’t attract as much unwelcome attention as a huge lens would. I also saved enough money that I was able to replace my 18-55mm kit lens with a 17-55mm IS F2.8 – very sharp and great for low light conditions (eg. hangar photos).
It’s a very individual decision, which you have to make based on your current and intended future usage of the lens. The above is my personal opinion, based on the way I use my lens. Your situation may be entirely different, requiring a different lens as a solution.
However, some good sites for lens reviews are:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/
This one has links to reviews at various websites, categorised by lens type:
http://www.massimocristaldi.com/wordpress/?p=65
Sign In
