AFH10 – it sounds like a story that should not be told! Incriminating photos, yes… I’ve got a cracking one of those… I am awaiting a small cheque from him or it’ll get posted here…

I’ll send you a small cheque to post it!

[QUOTE=Mark12]AFH10,

Of the thirty odd 1:1 Spitfires/Seafires I have directly or indirectly been involved with refinishing, including my own, over a similar number of years, I have found this little booklet to be invaluable, together with the Vickers works paint drawings and the Ministry of Aircraft Production colour chips. 😉

It regularly comes up on ebay.

Mark

[QUOTE]

I’m fully aware of the outstanding work you do with Spit colour schemes, what I can’t quite understand is why is this particular replica being singled out when there are others that are carying unauthentic/incorrect schemes. As I’ve always said, it’s up to the owners how they paint them. I’m just glad there are people who spend lots of dosh for the enthusiast to see the fruits of their labour. It’s just a shame they have their efforts trashed by some. For the record I think the silver and red mark 14 looks great even if it’s a mark 21 scheme.

This is a camou colours and roundel type combination issue…

…not a Mk type issue.

Very basic stuff.

Mark

So if the aforementioned red and silver mark 14 had roundels with wide wide bands your sensibilities would be offended then? (sorry not anal enough to know the diference between type A,B or C roundels).

Maybe if you are all that concerned we could have a whip round to repaint the green and brown replica which had no end of kids posing in front of it for pictures today? If it attracts a lot of interest it’s a good thing IMHO.

Hi,

I believe that the flying club members are fighting to be able to use the base until it becomes unlicensed and the fire crews are reassigned to different bases. Therefore it you contact the flying club in the near future; you will probably be able to fly in. I was until very recently, a member there myself. If you e-mail me, I will put in contact with the CFI.

p.s. the link below is of pictures of Coltishall Flying Clubs Cessna.

Not the Kelley from the late but unlamented Apex Fright training with the Police lady Mum? how the heck are you?

TT, have had an in depth conversation with the CAA today and they have told me that aircraft operated on a ‘military permit’ or under the A8-20 scheme will remain under Annexe 2, which I believe means they will be regulated under national regs and not EASA. I take that to mean that not much will change. I have also been given paperwork and contact names/numbers at the CAA for design surveyors regarding the T6 to clarify the current ‘fog’. I should be receiving more info shortly and then I’ll call AM with everything I’ve found out.

Sorry SimonH but I have to take Moggy’s viewpoint on this one. AFAIK drop zones are basically the same diameter as ATZ’s. Can you honestly say that everyone will be in that airspace when they jump from 10,000 feet?
I’ve also first hand experience of skydivers not exactly sticking to the rules. On a training cross country for an IMC was approaching an airfield with a drop zone to transit overhead at 3,500 feet, four miles to run, cloudbase broken at 2,500 feet tops 6000 feet (Cumulus). Gave them a courtesy call fully expecting to be told no traffic. Instead was told that the dropship was 2 minutes to drop from 10,000 feet and to route around. I thought that paradropping had to be in VMC? A friend who flies a dropship has confirmed that at times they have dropped on a GPS position.
As Moggy said, things aren’t always black and white and there is fault on both sides.

That’s just a coincidence honest

I know there are some honourable politicians,

Name an honourable politician and I’ll bet he/she just hasn’t been caught yet.

Just remember poli = latin for many, tics = blood sucking creatures,

poli + tics = politics.