Great post Ozjag Paul, in short,

Has the Historic Forum changed your outlook on historic aviation? Yes

Has anyone else experienced a change of priorities or interests because of this forum? No

Since coming to the forum it has made me look outside ‘my areas’ of aviation, there are some great experiences which I wouldn’t have thought likely before, such as being able to chat casually with a WWII fighter pilot (Cotteswold/Tim), and the likes of that guy from the ‘States with his outstanding Battle of Britain essay, and there’s JDK of course who always tries to get the grey cells working on all sorts of intrigueing subjects that I ordinarily wouldn’t have thought about.

I have never been into warbirds and the wars particularly so it is great to see some fascinating insight into operating these machines and the research on wartime aviation matter in general put in by some members – also their kindness in giving out their hard researched information on a forum is brilliant.
Even in the areas I particularly like there are the likes of Alertken, with his intstant oversight of British aviation industry and politics, which I find absolutely fascinating.

So I guess my outlook is much broader than it was, and my core interests/priorities are the same – but I have learnt alot more about them, and indeed made valuable like minded friends and contacts on the way.:)

Definitely not Oxford, http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/AWA1/301-400/walk340_Airspeed_Oxford/images_Richard_Eglen/Oxford.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/AWA1/301-400/walk340_Airspeed_Oxford/walk340.htm&usg=__j6ugSxJIffVvW-kW5Im_ldRg7zs=&h=524&w=750&sz=62&hl=en&start=2&zoom=1&tbnid=oRS9tQWH47n7nM:&tbnh=99&tbnw=141&ei=_dubTrrKEc_sObCptIkK&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dairspeed%2Boxford%2Bwalkaround%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1T4ACAW_enGB337GB337%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1
The cross bracing seems quite common for the time.

4ft doesn’t sound much but by the time the oleos are pumped up and the wheels fitted, combined with the fact that the legs look quite short on a Wimpey, there’s no doubt in my mind about them being Wellington,

Yep plus oleos will be compressed (rear examples fully so by the looks), on Wimpeys the axle supports actually bolt to the squarish ‘pads’ that you see at the bottom.
Looking at pictures of Wellingtons/Vikings/Valettas, the undercarriage legs don’t appear to be that tall anyway.

Certainly alot clearer Antoni, thanks.
As for the second shot it certainly looks like it could be St Eval, it even looks like it was taken at the same time as the main pic to me, but there is nothing in the shot to confirm it being at the Cornish base.

I know Mantson had its FIDO until 1958, I’m guessing that it was seen as such an important enough diversion airfield that it was best to keep the system in place.
Don’t forget that the electronic stuff such as SBA, BABs, and early ILS only got you down and close to the runway, the pilot still had to get visual with the runway before landing, something that FIDO had the advantage with at the time, being able to burn of the low level fog near the surface

There’s a well known picture of a BEA Ambassador on the FIDO lit runway at Blackbushe, sometime in 1952 I think.
I wonder if Blackbushe retained the system for Heathrow divesrions?
There was great local and parliamentry opposition to Heathrow having FIDO, because of the extra polution that it could cause, construction of a system there was commenced immediately post-war, and then cancelled.

ISTR reading that Manstons FIDO burn was estimated to cost around £44k per hour.

Hi Paul, alot of extra span Bisters were left open ended at both gables, this pic looks like it was taken on a very bright day when even black painted metal can look light, the angle of strong shadows combined with the orientation of the Blister appears to me like we are looking straight into it and seeing the inside shadow on the NW corner.
Also the church looks quite close to me.

BUT, having said that the building appearing to the left of the church in the photo would back up Nicks theory.

I’m not trying to say I’m right or wrong, just trying to present possibilities for Nicks & Dr Strangeloves ideas.

BTW this Blister appears in a 1954 vertical photo.

Blimey it dosen’t get any clearer does it!

The plan shown above is only a basic one, I’m guessing drawn up for a book, as it does miss out lots of detail and contains the confusing error which I have corrected (using the AM plans) below,

St Eval p1ed by Glassjar, on Flickr

In short Nick is right in his assertion on the location of the Blister in his opening post, and I believe DrStrangelove is correct in where the picture is taken, this is a very quick sketch up of how I imagine it.

St Eval p1ed2 by Glassjar, on Flickr

Wellington A is the closest to camera and looking under its nose we can see east to west, the church, Wellington C, running/taxying Wellington B which is obscuring the T2 hangar (BLG 119) behind it, Wellington D and the Blister hangar.
We are looking straight to the inside of the NW corner of the Blister and the dark quarter crescent is the shadow of the inside of the roof. The hangar’s openings are directly north and south.

Nick I believe you are saying that the pic is taken from blg 122 T2 hangar, I personally don’t think that this is possible due to the aircraft parking areas, the Blisters’ relation to the church and the fact that we can look straight through it almost.

You’ve inadvertently filled in some holes for me.

Lakenheath, Sculthorpe, West Raynham, & Marham were all rebuilt during the mid 1940s as Very Heavy Bomber stations, the only stations completed as such, complete with unique buildings such as the 294/45 VHB Control towers (largest in the RAF).

Heathrow was built as a Very Heavy Transport station, one of two, the other being St Mawgan, both featured the unique 1228/43 VHT towers.

Stansted, Mountfitchet, was I believe a standard USAAF bomber/depot station.

The bit I never could work out was what were the heavy bombers and transports?

These stations were far larger than the standard RAF bomber/transport stations of the time, and like you I assumed that heavy referred to range, and possibly frequency of movements.
You have supplied some aircraft info that I hadn’t known.

The B-36 was originally designed with the European theatre in mind (bombing Germany if Britain and its airfields were wiped out), not sure if that helps.

You forgot to mention that the B-29 was in a completely different league than that ghastly Windsor, I too cannot understand how money was spent on that, even Lincoln appeared superior!