QuietER
Does the number of rotorblades affect the amount of noise a helecopter produces?
I only ask because the Huey is known to be quite a noisy chopper with only two blades but the Gazelle(3) and the Lynx(4) are much quieter.
….or have they and I haven’t been able to see them?
It still operates out of Boscombe Down as part of the ETPS they also have two more there as well as a couple of BAC 1-11s operated by QinetiQ but due to the sensitive nature of the base Cant get any pics.
Martin
I live only a couple of miles from Boscombe Down and saw her flying over a couple of times last week.
I’ll keep an eye out for her and hopefully will be able to post a picture or two sometime during coming week.
So does this qualify as a myth? which I’ve heard it from a number of people over the years.
“The TU144 was a copy of Concorde” – Debate.
Steve
But couldn’t that be said about a lot of cold war developed airframes “it was a copy of”?
MiG29/Su27 bore considerable similarities with the F15.
MiG23, F111?
MiG25, F108 possibly SR71?
I think there are very few airframes that haven’t been copied in some way in order to keep the technological gap between nations as small as possible.
tache3
Several people have commented previously about the authenticity of the low MiG picture elsewhere. Like yourself they also queried the lack of a sense of motion but I think this can easily be explained.
If the photo was taken using a camera with a high shutter speed the possible blurring caused by a moving target could very well be eliminated.
Also if you look at the very rear of the aircraft there does seem to be some degree of motion blurring at the rearmost point of the MiG.
Is the photo 100% genuine?
I firmly believe so!
DAN J,
Found this about EN224 but wasn’t able to find any pictures;
Used for airscrew trials while at CRD Vickers-Armstrong; damaged on 27/6/44 when it was struck by EN221 in a landing accident; currently the only surviving Spitfire XII. Under restoration by Peter Arnold who found the remains at Cranfield
HP57,
I managed to find a couple of good pictures of Mk22s for you, enjoy…
I think Richard Todd ought to have a cameo role in the new film.
Saw him earlier in the year when he came to see the Horsa at Shawbury and he still looks pretty spry.
Incidentally. I met an ex 106 sqn pilot a few years back, and his opinion of Gibson as a Sqn Commander was interesting. He described him as a thoroughly nasty, self-opinionated bully whose arrogance could match that of Bader.
This of course was only one man’s view.
Anyone else heard anything similar?
Yes, some years ago I heard several reports about the ‘real’ Guy Gibson. They was on a programme on TV where various ex members of the squadrens Gibson flew with were talking about his skills as a pilot and as a Squadren commander.
He was portrayed as anything but the the wonderful model to kids of the day (and more since) as he is shown to be in the Dambusters film and books.
‘PCing’ the film
What is the matter with everyone, going on about Nig@er/Trigger/Digger or whoever he’ll be.
I thought some time ago the BBFC introduced a system of film classification to ensure youngsters would be protected from seeing and hearing inappropriate things.
Nig@er/Trigger/Digger?
Easy.
Dambusters cert U/PG, Digger.
Dambusters cert 15, Trigger.
Dambusters cert 18 (poss 18a :confused: ), Nig@er.
Everybody would thus be left happy, the PC brigade would only purchase cert U/PG or possibly 15 and the vast majority of the population who aren’t fussed would buy cert 18/18a.
Now onto the serious points about the film… the cast;
Barnes Wallis, could only be Ian Lavender.
Guy Gibson would have to be Sean Bean.
Gibsons wing man Flt Lt Hopgood, Robson Green with his Flt Eng Sgt Brennan played by Jerome Flynn. It would be good to see them two together again.
C in C Bomber Command would be well and truly bought to life by John Cleese.
The last remaining part is that of Director. I’m not sure personally but as long as the film is kept as true to life as possible I’m not overly bothered. re the Lancasters and special effects make maximum use of PA474 and possibly it’s Canadian brother and only use computer generated images as an absolute last resort.
As for flying from RAF Scampton, as it is still an active airfield I can’t see why the RAF/MoD would have any problems with the site being used for filming.
The new USMC troop carrier aircraft has been revealed….
Brit Phantoms
PhantomII, I managed to find a selection of pictures of Brit Phantoms but couldn’t find any with weapons.
Quote:
Pte1643
Originally Posted by WP840
These two shots of the Buccaneer show pure design genius.
But what about the Tornado GR1/4?
.
.
.
The Harrier GR3 or maybe the GR7?
Since when were these fighters?
Fight, to attack.
FightER, attackER.
GR1/4, GR3, GR7, Ground ATTACK Recoconnaissance.
Since they became known as GR’X’s. :rolleyes:
Here RR299 for ya….
I’ve found a photo, unfortunately it’s only her nose but it’s a start…. 😮
here we go:
This is such a difficult thread to post on, my favorite fighter?
These two shots of the Buccaneer show pure design genius.
But what about the Tornado GR1/4?
The Hurricane IIb?
The Hunter FGA9?
The Harrier GR3 or maybe the GR7?
Over the wall we have the MiG29 Fulcrum, MiG31 Foxhound, Su25 Frogfoot?
All of the above aircraft could easily hold claim to being my favorite fighter but like lukey lad I think I’ll side with the Buccaneer!
Aviation genius! 😎
WOW!
I have just finished watching Dambusters (again) and each time I watch it the sheer brilliance of the film making never ceases to amaze me.