dark light

MarkG

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 466 through 480 (of 718 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: CGS Gunsights #1359057
    MarkG
    Participant

    Mk.5 GGS on a retractable mounting in the Hunter. Mod 378 introduced the Mk.8 GGS on a fixed mounting – that would have been for the late F.6 onwards.

    Mark

    in reply to: Canberra T4 WT486 #1378974
    MarkG
    Participant

    I’ve got a good set of T.4 Pilot’s Notes I could scan the instrument panel illustrations from if it’s any use to you? PM me.

    in reply to: …Your exit may be behind you… #1382539
    MarkG
    Participant

    Always thought the entrance of the Mossie was underneath or some reason.
    .

    Underneath (but still ofset to starboard) on the bombers, but on the starboard side for the fighters.

    What about the Gannet? That has the pilot’s steps on the starboard side.

    in reply to: The last, last SHAR Hurrah #1386988
    MarkG
    Participant

    Yes, the JP T.5 that normally resides at Yeovilton (dunno the tail number) did display as a last minute stand-in for Hercules.

    in reply to: The last, last SHAR Hurrah #1387449
    MarkG
    Participant

    “Yes” I went (just got home) and “no” I’m not at all disappointed – I had a blinkin’ lovely day!

    Would have been nice to see more Harrier stuff though.

    in reply to: Blackpool Vulcan Latest #1429912
    MarkG
    Participant

    How has he “relinquished ownership” then? Has he just handed it back to Bateson and written off the £15k or has he had a refund of some kind? Is this the result of the legal action that was going on? :confused:

    in reply to: A few pics #1429921
    MarkG
    Participant

    MarkG,

    That Hunter is NOT a GA11, it is a stock F4 that was one of a number that were destined for GA11 conversion but were never actually converted. They were allocated as Ground Instructional airframes and XF365 went to AES at Lee on Solent in 1962 where I guess it was photographed. Remained as a GI until sold to HSA for conversion and sale to Swiss AF.

    Ah, many thanks leornato, that explains it nicely. I’m not sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me though… 🙂

    That Hunter is NOT a GA11

    I did say that it was certainly not a GA.11 but an F.4, although I don’t think I’d call it a “stock F.4” as it has blast deflectors fitted which were very uncommon on that mark.

    Thanks again for the info. I still think the colour scheme and markings are weird though 😉

    in reply to: A few pics #1430674
    MarkG
    Participant

    I can’t figure out that Hunter.

    Although it appears to be in FRADU colours it’s certainly not a GA.11 (it has guns, no arrestor hook, straight leading edges etc.). Looks like an F.4 to me but with blast deflectors and link collectors fitted.

    Even the colour scheme looks weird – the cheat line on the forward fuselage is very high for a Hunter and there are no tail markings at all.

    On top of that all the records show XF365 as having been converted from an F.4 to a Swiss F.58A – which would explain the configuration in the photograph but not the colour scheme. :confused:

    in reply to: 'Mystery' web pics #1343158
    MarkG
    Participant

    How much of a mystery can the picture of the Lightning T.4 be, when it has “Lightning T.4” written on the side of it! 😀

    in reply to: Aircraft Cockpit Sections/Instrument Panel Projects #1360902
    MarkG
    Participant

    Well, here are mine.

    The Hunter is ex-Qatar Emiri Air Force FGA.78 QA12 and the Vampire T.11 is XE985. Both have a way to go before they look pristine again! 😀

    Incidentally, I’m desperate for photos of XE985 when in service (with 32 Sqn. then 5 FTS) as I haven’t been able to obtain a single one yet. So if anyone has anything at all then I’d love to see them.

    I also needs loads of parts, but that’s another story!

    in reply to: Harrier Gr.1 #1377606
    MarkG
    Participant

    Mark – A GR.5 or 7 nose cone isn’t compatible with GR.1/3 airframe in any way.

    David, yes I just realised that and was editing my post when you replied! Is it a T.4 nose cone then?

    in reply to: Harrier Gr.1 #1377621
    MarkG
    Participant

    Except that one looks like a Harrier II…(coz it is!)

    Flood

    You sure about that?

    ZD670 is certainly a GR.3 (and therefore not a Harrier II) but that nose cone doesn’t look like a GR.1 – where’s the camera window for starters and what’s the bump underneath? Looks more like a T.4 cone…?

    Come on Dave, spill the beans! 😀

    in reply to: Identify the hoist #1377637
    MarkG
    Participant

    Nope, not Hunter gun pack. The hoists used on the Hunters wasn’t specific to that application anyway, they were standard RAF Type C bomb hoists of which this isn’t one. It does look vaguely similar though.

    A spigot (just a large ‘lug’ with a protective plate) was screwed into a hole one each side of the Hunter fuselage above the gunpack and one hoist was hooked on each. The hook required for that would be in a similar position to the fitting in the second photo but it is literally a ‘hook’ and certainly not the device visible here. A third hoist was hooked onto a fitting built in to the aircraft at the front centre of the gunpack. The end of the wire rope from each side hoist was then hooked onto a strap which passed under the gun pack to support it. The cable from the front hoist hooked directly onto the front of the gun pack. The pack was then unlocked and all three hoists were wound down together to lower the pack out of the aircraft.

    In order to attach the wire rope to the gun pack (and the support strap) it needed to be terminated with a hook so again that doesn’t match what we have here which is some sort of ball fitting.

    I have one of these Type C hoists in my shed, if I can get at it easily I’ll photograph it for comparison.

    My guess is that this is not aircraft or application specific but rather a general purpose bomb hoist equivalent to the Type C used by the RAF.

    in reply to: Culdrose – No Pics Yet – Sea Hawk #1381569
    MarkG
    Participant

    What I’m really complaining about is what was missing – Hunters, for one

    For some reason I thought XE601 was displaying at Culdrose but, for the life of me, I can’t work out where I thought I’d read that. I take it ‘601 wasn’t there then?

    in reply to: Newark Cockpit Fest #1428105
    MarkG
    Participant

    Dave,

    All the Hunters on the list here turned up plus another Hunter which the owner hadn’t identified. After a bit of detective work it turned out to be F.4 WW664.

    I will be adding a photo page of participants to the website as soon as I get chance, although I’m off on my hols on the weekend so it might not appear for a couple of weeks.

Viewing 15 posts - 466 through 480 (of 718 total)