The main spars of the Spitfire were made of several nested layers of channel form spring steel.[/QUOTE]

No, not steel – Aluminium (L168 springs to mind but I may be incorrect on that) tubes, nested within each other (other than the Spitfire 18 which had solid spar booms)

Does anyone know who this seller is?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ww2-raf-spitfire-mk11-oxygen-regulator-/271692980846?pt=UK_CPV_Aviation_SM&hash=item3f4229e26e

Thanks

Is the Vulcan duplicated within the RAFM organisation as a whole (ignoring the external Waddington example still with the RAF)? I thought they only had the one airframe. If not, being such an iconic aircraft in the eyes of the public I find it interesting that they are considering moving it from their showcase location, let alone disposing of full stop.

As an aside, I saw an interesting e-mail from the RAF Museum recently. Having been offered fully restored WW2 type not currently in their collection in a fit state to display, they e-mailed back stating that the type concerned had no relevance to the RAF. An e-mail was sent back confirming that not only were a great many RAF pilots trained on the type in general, but many RAF pilots had actually been trained on the actual individual aeroplane concerned. I understand that no response was forthcoming……….

Paper? I’m an aviation enthusiast, not a fancier of quality wood pulp products. I couldn’t care less about the quality of the paper the magazine is printed on, nor I have to say am I worried about B&W pictures. The reason I buy a magazine (or generally don’t these days) is the quality of the journalism and depth of the articles. There is a reason there was an abundance of text in the 80’s, and that’s because articles were covered in much greater depth, better researched, and to me at least of much greater relevance.

I hope AM stays – to be honest neither Flypast nor AM are the magazines are they once used to be either in quality or content. I have been reading both since the early 80s and have noted more of a downward spiral in FP over the years than AM. If only FP could get back to the quality of the early days with their excellent “Type Report” sections and the really in-depth articles along the lines of the 1985 (I think) article on the rebuild of G-FIRE. Really in depth and technically interesting. Both magazines have dumbed down over the past few years (in fairness in line with the rest of the print and broadcast media industry) and both can comfortably be read in Smiths in a spare ten minutes.

As a slight aside, whatever happened to the Mike Twite Trophy that used to be issued for preservation efforts each year? Seemed to have been allowed to slowly vanish.

For those intent on obtaining a Spitfire project, £250,000 spent wisely elsewhere will yield you a substantial selection of useable parts towards a project, rather than a pile of essentially scrap wreckage of little use beyond a conversation-piece.