Well as you all know I am loathe to disbelieve these sorts of theories concerning lost aircraft, preferring instead to trust in the absolute veracity of the claims made, but even I who will believe anything, so long as it defies logic because it therefore shows that logic is just something invented by conspiracists to divert us from the truth (but that’s another story), find that a piece of aluminium manufactured no earlier than 1943 but miraculously transported back in time to 1937 could, possibly, be a step too far. Unless it is a further evidence of the government conspiracy to cover up the well-attested fact that besides being a shape-shifter (Irene/Amelia evidence) Earhart was able to travel forward in time to 1943 to get a piece to take back to 1937 with the intention of playing a practical joke on TIGHAR.

It could work for me – I don’t know about the rest of you, but if you disbelieve the evidence as TIGHAR has presented it you could be playing into the hands of a murky CIA/KGB/MI6/Mossad plot to hide the fact Ms Earhart is alive and well and married to Elvis Presley and they enjoy quiet nights at home eating deep fried peanut butter and bacon sandwiches (Amelia has put on a lot weight apparently).

But presumably, in their present form, FlyPast and/or Aeroplane must appeal to someone – or else one or the other or both wouldn’t still be in publication. It just seems that they don’t, apparently, appeal to a significant number of members of this forum (or maybe, to be more precise, contributors to this thread). Maybe those who are happy with their format don’t feel the need to say so – because they are getting what they want. Maybe those who aren’t happy feel the need to say so – because they aren’t getting what they want. But if the majority are satisfied, then I suspect that however much and however loud the minority shout, their words will fall on deaf ears. I wonder how long it will be before somene says to the minority – in which I include myself – that if neither FlyPast nor Aeroplane provide what they want, then go and publish a new title that does so – if you’re prepared to take the risk that it may not stack up commercially, for the minority may not be large enough to provide the circulation that such a title would need to survive in the cut-throat world of modern publishing!

In my day job I am continually surprised by the large number of people who are firearms collectors who simply ignore the internet and rely either on magazines or contact with other collectors. To me the internet and the information I can glean from it is essential and one of the main reasons I don’t bother with most magazines except one on line journal and one traditional paper type. Regarding AM and FP I never liked the latter much considering it messy and not offering anything new while the former as I said I found became repetitive. But one man’s repetition is another’s new information so I would hate to see either disappear especially given the number of people to whom the internet and forums etc. are a complete unknown resource.

Well there you go – just shows how long ago I found it was getting repetitive.

How many .303’s and Mausers does one chap need?

If you collect the variations and store them safely and hold the arms legally according to the laws of the country in which you live then the answer depends on how many you need to complete a collection. I collect antique firearms, I also collect 20th century firearms and for that matter I also collect 18th century glass and porcelain. I don’t collect deactivated weapons because that would be like collecting broken porcelain. I obey the law, meet the onerous storage and security requirements and publish articles at times if I have something which I feel will add to knowledge of the subject. Arms and antique collecting is not a moral issue it is just another form of study for the advanced collector and scholar – the real problem is that there are people who like to make it so because they appear to lack the capacity to develop an interest in anything except interfering in the lives of people who are pursuing interests within the framework of the regulations if any that society uses to govern them. I suspect that if you wanted a complete collection of Spitfires or some other aircraft (designed to carry weapons) and could afford to do so you’d be at it in a flash.

As a long time and legally fully approved antique arms collector (50 years +) that picture does not show dug up finds from metal detecting. Not being a UK citizen I cannot comment on your laws but I’d say at first glance all that ordnance and weapons is a collection of some years standing and probably in most case deactivated. We sometimes have raids like that here where the seized items are displayed for the media who generally use only the police press release rather than any real expertise for the story. Our laws do not require deactivation for weapons but naturally do in the case of ordnance.

In some instances the police get it right, in some instances there have been red faces later because the seized items were legally held and there had been the usual official **** up. But to say again I don’t believe the story about them being either dug up or stolen from a now 75 year old ex-POW camp.

Appears to rely on the curvature of the Earth to gain altitude.

Presumably because they spent most of their service lives outside hangars so ground concealment was more important.