dark light

pagen01

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 526 through 540 (of 9,672 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: ahh – de Havilland #955371
    pagen01
    Participant

    Fantastic line-up and photos.
    I can recognise most of the DH types there, but is the rotary engined type 2nd from left?
    How come it will be the Mosquitos’ final show in NZ?

    Edit, DH5 just seen the answers at bottom of post!:o

    in reply to: Would the Harrier exist without the Short SC.1? #957031
    pagen01
    Participant

    This (chp 1.1) http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avav81.html is a good overview on just how multi national P.1127/Harrier development really was, long before the Kestrel.

    in reply to: Lanc control wheels / Shackleton Control Column Find #957946
    pagen01
    Participant

    The SMR Lancasters had 2nd pilot wheels, I assumed (probably wrongly!) that OTU, LFS aircraft had them as well, or was it just Coastal Lancs?

    in reply to: Peter Vallance #958930
    pagen01
    Participant

    What terribly bad news, thoughts with family and friends and RIP.
    It’s people like this and their dedication to preserving less obvious types of aircraft, in less than ideal conditions that I really admire.

    Thanks for letting us know Rob.

    in reply to: Would the Harrier exist without the Short SC.1? #959485
    pagen01
    Participant

    Would the Harrier exist without the Short SC.1? Yes.

    The P.1127 Harrier was an early (maybe the first?) departure from the multiple lift and seperate propulsion engines idea by using just one powerplant combined with vectoring thrust for both its forward speed and VTOL needs.
    BE53/Pegasus layout owes more to Frenchman Michel Wibaults propulsion theories than to the existing lift engine ideas, something that Bristol Engines’ Sir Stanley Hooker picked up on very early on, and Sir Sydney Camm not long after.
    This was the master stroke that effectively turned heavy and very complicated and inefficient aircraft designs and prototypes into a lighter and combat capable machine.
    Nothing is designed in isolation of course, and I dare say some systems like the puffer jet controls of the TMR & SC.1 influenced the Harrier design teams.

    In propulsion terms I view the SC.1 as the end of one idea and the P.1127 as the start of a new one.

    BTW I like your callsign AT, bit of a Richard James fan myself!

    in reply to: Canberra XH134 #960420
    pagen01
    Participant

    The PR.9 uses the Avon 200 series, so is different to all the other Canberra variants that use various 100 series engines.
    It’s the same series but a different Mk (206) to the Vixen (208) and later Hunters (203/207), I wouldn’t know if they could be physically interchanged, but I doubt paperwork issues would allow it.

    My understanding us that a good spares and engine package came with these Canberras to allow them to be supported.
    The earlier type Canberra engine seems to be quite hard to source now.

    in reply to: Canberra XH134 #960768
    pagen01
    Participant

    how are her two sister a/c getting on?

    One of them, XH131, went to the museum at Long Kesh, N.Ireland in 2010.

    in reply to: Airfield photos – 'Then and Now' #961341
    pagen01
    Participant

    Amazing amount of work there Stephen, especially the desert scene which can’t have been easy.
    Liking the Piece Of Cake bridge as well!

    in reply to: Lancaster B.1(FE) #962637
    pagen01
    Participant

    Thanks Jack, found a nice pic of 207 B.I FE (A, possibly SW303) after I posted!

    Just to clarify about the turrets, the FEs retained the mid upper turrets in squadron service.
    Whether the initial idea of the Tiger Force mods was to remove them to save weight I really don’t know, but when that idea was cancelled the Lancasters retained the armament.
    One quick way to tell a B.I FE from a B.IIV FE is by the large shrouded upper turret of the early mark, as opposed to the more forward located and smaller turret of the VII.

    The saddle tank idea was part of the FE force idea, but unsure if it might have been devised before?

    Nice to see a thread about these early post-war Lancasters as you don’t see an awful lot about them.
    They are one of my favourite schemed variants in the dramatic white over black undersides.

    Has anyone here seen a photo of an FE in the later full roundels?

    in reply to: Your first Spitfire #962655
    pagen01
    Participant

    I love that sharkmouth Spit in post #62!

    I must have seen Spitfires at the 70s St Mawgan shows, but the first one that I became aware of was the Nick Grace two seater that was rebuilt at nearby St Merryn. Was lucky enough to look around it one evening, and remember its early flights.

    in reply to: Lancaster B.1(FE) #963633
    pagen01
    Participant

    Didn’t it also have the mid upper turret removed?

    The B.I FE retained the mid upper turret.

    Two squadrons equiped with the type from 1945 to 1949/50, 7 at Upwood and 35 at Graveley & Stradishall. It was this latter unit that performed the 16 a/c ‘Operation Goodwill’ tour of the ‘States in the summer of 1946. I’m wondering if the extra range of this version facilitated that.

    I would agree with Mark, in that these new aircraft would be in storage and available for use.

    Edit, 207 at Stradishall might have used the B.I FE as well, but can’t establish if it was that mark or the B.VII FE

    in reply to: Duxford Diary 2013 #964288
    pagen01
    Participant

    I love that staff car, is it a Hunber and does it have significant history?

    Great to see detail shots of the the Ambassador nearing completion.

    in reply to: Lower Than A Snake's Belly In A Wagon Rut #964306
    pagen01
    Participant

    Very good, I remember seeing the Su-27 and Tu something arrival at Boscombe, should have pics somewhere.
    Funny, but the Phantom between the hangars at Saints will be one of my airfield before and after shots!
    I can never tire of that last low-level Spitfire clip!

    in reply to: Origin of calling 'Final' is this true? #964418
    pagen01
    Participant

    It is quite possible both terms were used and are similar enough that one appears to be the source of the other.

    Possibly, the lighting systems were developments of each other.
    Apologies if I’m misunderstanding you here, but there isn’t such a thing as ‘a funnel lighting’ system.

    Originally there were various lighting systems in use, including the pre-war Chance floodlighting abd Contact lighting.
    New designs came along to standardise systems such as Drem which was known as A.F.L. MkI.
    MkII introduced funnels, including outer, intermediate, and inner funnel arrangements to pick up from the outer circle of lights and feed (or funnel)aircraft directly to the flare path and runway.
    MkIII had main funnels and fog funnels.
    I’m unsure at what Mk AFL it changed but funnels gave way to cross bar lighting on the approach and better radio approach aids.

    Just out of interest, the funnel lights also had a take-off use whereby they supplied horizon reference to a departing aircraft crew at night.

    It’s a huge subject, which AP3236 covers well.

    in reply to: VC-10 Retirement Thread (merged) #964462
    pagen01
    Participant

    Some went to St.Athan for scrapping before it closed.

    That’s not correct, non of the latest round of VC-10 scrappings have been at or involved St Athan. They are all being broken up at Brunty, though parts are being removed to return to the spares/parts inventry.

    All of the K.2s were scrapped at Saints in the early 2000s, along with a C.1K. Most of the K.4s and a C.1K was broken up there in 2006.

    St Athan isn’t closed either, DARA/DSG have gone from the site though.

Viewing 15 posts - 526 through 540 (of 9,672 total)