Not off the top of my head and it doesn’t sound familiar, but blister hangars were comparitively easy to move and erect on semi prepared areas.
Also worth remembering that the airfield was in a constant state of change during the war, such as the fighter pens which were later built over etc.
I will try and look at some pictures tonight though Nick.
PS I can’t view your Google link due to the PC I’m using.
:D:D:D They will outed (or routed!) one day!
Absolutely incredible work Cees, real dedication to the type.
Don’t forget the Hampden and Heyford need resurecting!
Yes please –o-o-O-o-o–, that would be appreciated.:)
It does seem though that the majority of preserved Javelins seem to have the back seat area partially stripped.
I’m particularly keen to see the radar scope and kit for AI.17 and AI.22 variants.
Maybe someone has pictures from pilots notes etc?
Soooo, I’m alone in wanting to travel the planet to see the mighty Fairey Gannet!:eek:
Well I’d never have guessed there would be a Ganneting of the thread! I can let you have pics of the Aussie ones in Queensland, NSW and Victoria (at Moorabbin) to save your pennies. 😀
That would be very much appreciated, in your own time James.:)
If I’m reading right it looks like so far that the XB-70 Valkyrie is the most populor, followed by the B-29 & B-36 – looks like US bombers are in vogue.
Thanks T/O, I must admit I can never back navigate through the webiste and rely on your links to get straight to the right parts, where do I find the Meteor panel?
Also have to say that the Shackleton is looking bloomin marvelous!:)
What a fantastic memorial/sculpture to the Fairey IIID and its crew, thanks for sharing.:)
I can’t help thinking that if this was in the UK it wouldn’t look like that for very long!
Thx, Peter just done so!:)
The UK industry never fielded a small cheap jet in the Citation class or a large cabin aircraft in the Gulfstram/Falcon/Challenger class. Obviously you can’t look at all bizjets as one market when you consider the cost and size differences. Why did Cessna sell a lot of Citations? Its low cost made it possible to sell planes to firms that couldn’t afford or need a larger jet. Same reason why Ford sells more cars than Bentley.
Yes, you are certainly right there, and the 125 is one of the outstanding British designs, regarding the cabin size it seemed that British designers strived to have standing space inside a business aircraft.
But even here we have let a wonderful product partially slip from our hands, as final assembly is carried out by Raytheon in the ‘States.
Am I correct in thinking that it was the Citation that got Cessna in trouble from a business point of view?
Back to your analogy, I wonder who makes the biggest profit from their products, Ford or Bentley?
aerospacetech, I agree with your statement from an earlier history point of view, but surely from at least the expansion-era (’35-’39) period on the constituent companies within the HS group were a bit bigger than ‘cottage industry’?
Thanks for that, reply sent.
Would also like to thank Wieesso, who did mention ‘UP previously, and everyone else who has helped me correct the figures.:)
As someone who is more military serial orientated this highlights the problems of tallying production totals with total aircraft of the type to appear on civil registers, compounded by re-serialled aircraft.
Ah!! I wondered all along if G-AIUP (along with G-ALBX) was the stinker!
I think you’ve nailed it, thank you:)
I know this all looks a bit overboard but it is nice to establish all aircraft of the production batches.
You’ve listed G-ANUN and G-ANVO separately (same aircraft). Does that help?
Unfortunately no, we can get the totals from the military serials alone in that batch,
MW100 – 149, 50 a/c
MW161 – 210, 50 a/c
MW223 – 272, 50 a/c
MW284 – 333, 50 a/c
PE101 – 108, 8 a/c
208 acft
The previous batch
TS789-‘813 (to G-AGNL-‘NZ G-AGOA-‘OF, G-AGSL-‘SP) 25 a/c
G-AHEW-‘EZ, 4 a/c
G-AHFA-‘FI, 9 a/c
G-AHLV & G-AIUP, 2 a/c
LV-XGN-‘XGP (to G-AMGK-‘GM), 3 a/c
Say LV-XIG or ‘XIH, 1 a/c
44 acft
leaves ‘XIG or ‘XIH spare
I will try and break it down a bit,
LV626, ‘629, ‘633 & 639
4 York prototypes
TS789-‘813 (to G-AGNL-‘NZ G-AGOA-‘OF, G-AGSL-‘SP) G-AHEW-‘EZ, G-AHFA-‘FI, G-AHLV, G-AIUP, G-ALBX, LV-XGN-‘XGP (to G-AMGK-‘GM)
44 York I,
MW100-149, MW161-210, MW223-272, MW284-333, PE101-108 (to G-AGJA-‘JE, G-AMRI & ‘RJ, G-AMUL-‘UN, G-AMUS-‘UV, G-AMVY & ‘VZ, G-AMXM,
G-ANAA-‘AC, G-ANAW, G-ANGF-‘GL G-ANRC, G-ANSY, G-ANTH-‘TK, G-ANUN, G-ANVO, G-ANXJ-‘XO, G-ANYA, G-AOAN & G-APCA)
208 York C.I,
LV262
1 York C.II, conversion
256 Total British Yorks
LV-XIG & ‘XIH don’t fit and make two aircraft over those totals, however G-ALBX that I have listed is Canadian build, which now leaves one aircraft over.
Thanks for bearing with me on this.
Excellent, I was kind of hoping you would be along!
Well most published figures do state 256 British built Yorks, but the five export aircraft to Argentina do seem to bump the total to 258 aircraft.
However as pointed out by Wieesso, one of the aircraft that I had counted, G-ALBX, is in fact a Canadian build, this brings the British total down to 257.
My post #9 should list every aircraft but appears a mess I’m afraid.
I can’t help but think that there is an anomaly with one other aircraft listed and that the figure really should be 256?
PS, the previous day I was sorting Lancastrians & Tudors, they really did make my head ache!
Or have they changed the spelling to get around some sort of copywrite issue?
Good to see someone manufacturing them again, I have always thought the Bessonneau (in its different variaties) was a remarkable design, and that there is still a use for them.