I have this picture taken in Malasia, wonder if anyone could ID it from the code letter? serial number is not clear enough to read
RH806 was coded J at one time, dosen’t nescesarily mean it is this aircraft though.
Edit, so was WB236! I think you would need to know Squadron and date to positively ID this Brigand
Because the Big Chiefs of the army didn’t want to offend Native Americans by naming a gunship after one of their tribes.
I don’t buy it.
Nor do I, that sounds like very badly researched internet stuff, which unfortunately some will believe – what about Apache, Chinook, and Cheyene?!
Still a very sleek looking helicopter IMO, and as small, straightforward gunship, dosen’t seem to have been truely replaced.
The owner and pilot, Phil Connolly will have a 3 ship Vietnam Classic Flight here in the UK to fly at Airshows! .
Please,please, let that consist of an F-105, Skyraider, and Huey Cobra!!
Joking aside, can’t wait to see the Cobra.
Hmm, my courgettes do need a cloche!
That must be a seriously sized bit of kit?
Now that is unusual, the guy knows what pretty much everything is, hence the labels, but god knows where he got that from.
That’s what I was wondering!
Canopy far right corner looks interesting. Hotspur glider perhaps ?.
Not quite, compare with Hotspur pics, I’m dead excited though because I think it is B-45 Tornado!
They have 16 panes in the main part of canopy with two panes in rear part, which the above seems to have – if correct what a find!
But this flying wing was actually designed by the Nazis 30 years before the Americans successfully developed radar-invisible technology.
Hate to burst the bubble, but the XB-35 and 49 where found to be near invisible to radar aswel, accidentally discovered during bombing trials in the late 1940s. The previous Northrop types may have had low radar signatures aswel, but unlikely to have been trialled for ‘stealth’ reasons as such.
Is there any evidence to support the fact that stealth technology was in the minds of the Horton Brothers and Luftwaffe, or is it a case of neatly fitting facts after the event?
I’ve always liked the look of the Brigand as it looks very purposeful and must have sounded great with two Centauraus’ roaring away.
I understand there were major issues with the gun ports but does anyone know what other faults / failings the aircraft had?
Good question, as the airframe is conventional and straight forward enough, and the Centaurus didn’t seem particularly unreliable on other types of the day – on paper it seems the Brigand should have been superb, but it seems to have an uneviable reputation.
It seems like only yesterday you could find ’em lying around the ‘home counties’. Mark
Bloody hell!
Nigelrob, I agree with you, as a kid it was a favourite type and one that appeared at the top of my ‘like to own and fly’ wish list!
Good point Dave, and what exactly do museums do with book collections, I’ve never seen mention of access to this material?
First one looks like an Armstrong Siddeley Atlas I.
No 3, Westland Wallace without spats.
Definately F Type aircraft sheds in background to both pics.
For me it has to be the Lockheed LP-2J Neptune on skis.
Though a ski equiped Grumman Albatross (only type to easily operate from water, land and ice?) would run a close second
Photo credited to Jay Slagle and from the P2VNEPTUNEORG site
The Atlas in photograph 1 is interesting in that not many were still in service in 1936.
There were a few with the Electrical & Wireless School at Cranwell so it could have been visiting if it is Manston in 1936
Amongst their aircraft were K1482 & K1483 which were with the Unit in 1936
That would fit well with the hangar type in the background, it is an F Type which was primarily an admiralty type but some where re-erected on RAF airfields, Cranwel did (does?) have them. Not sure that Manston did.
The same hangar design appears in the Wallace pic.
Might be worth checking on the current situation of the Source aviation twin boomers.
Happy new year to you as well, be aware that the early editions have sold for around £200
Blimey, I have the 1st and 2nd eds here (and probably the 9th somewhere)
These were fantastic little books and I was always fascinated by the photos and descriptions of the aircraft, but particularly interested in the silloutes and how they might have been created. I often wondered why they where black with white detail, until it was explained to me that it was a far better way of learning aircraft shapes – simple and effective eh.
They where also great books for tracing development of certain aircraft, and seeing how much (or little) we knew about Eastern Block types.
Anyone got gen of who was behind these books and any history?
Edit; looks from above there is no 9th!