😀 😀 😀 I wouldn’t say no, actually 🙂

Right, who mentioned George Formby…~reads back~…ooooh curse you Dave Homewood 😀 I will now have “When I’m cleaning windows” stuck in my head all afternoon…and this is my least favourite song of all time…it just makes me want to grab his ukele and slam it down hard on his head…shoving it somewhere would also be good :diablo: :dev2: :diablo:

I like instrumental 1940s style music – Glenn Miller, Charlie Kunz sorta stuff…stuff that gets you in the mood…the aviation mood that is before Snapper and co start up…mind you if that’s what floats your boat 😀 Not a great fan of warbling…bit of Vera Lynn is alright mind but not too hot on the likes of Gracie Fields…

Women in uniform………..ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhmmmmm! :dev2:

Yes when going over water,think they carry two stored inside.
Phil. 🙂

I would suggest two MS10’s.

The original fit would have floated to surface. The Mossie had a box behind the cockpit which floated on out

On a crash location I found one little parts of aluminium.
It has a stemp with the number: 57953 C 37 A 17946 and the inspection stamp: 46B (in circle)

who can tell me, if this a part from a halifax aircraft ?

and who have a link to a website about serial numbers and stamps of aircraft parts for british aircrafts ?

57 is the starting part of a Halifax part number, so yes

This takes me back to the first fuel crisis-after Suez. There were stories (scurrilous I’m sure) that the Messerschmit was made from war surplus 110 cockpit covers. 🙂 around 60 mpg though, I believe.
mmitch.

Yep 60mpg no problems! First Schmitts powered by the engine used to turn over the gas turb’s in the 262. No other aeroplane parts in the Schmitt. However, the one I wrote off had a makers plate from a 109 in it. Last fuel crisis out came the Schmitt!

Most excellent vehicle, Canada TD. I would say it rates right up there with the Citroen 2CV.

Does it have an engine, or do you just paddle.

Cheeky chappie!!! Don’t knock it til you’ve tried….I’ll swap you a go in my Schmitt for a trip in your gorgeous Fury!!

It (the Schmitt) certainly has the directional stability of a T6 on wet grass!!!!

And Anna, it is lovely, Emil is now crying at the thought of you not liking her! To be serious (well kinda!) I am taking the Schmitt to Duxford next year and it will be available for ‘test’ drives. I ‘flew’ a test pilot in her once and he could not stop smiling….but then again he took me in his aircraft and I reciprocated in the grinning inanely department.

Mr Patterson sir, this is what you need in your hangar instead of those bikes! A rel man’s car!!!!!???? :dev2:

snipped

4. While we’re on the subject of the French, they insist that all their test crews are suitably qualified and their licenses are marked accordingly. They differentiate between: Test Pilots, Flight Test Engineers, Flight Test Instrumentation Engineers, Flight Engineers (Test) and Maintenance Test Pilots – all have different qualifications. None are allowed to practice in their respective roles without the appropriate qualification. If only we could have the same ruling over here. We wouldn’t dream of going to an unqualified doctor, even if he had lots of experience in the role. We insist that our aircraft is engineered and signed off by a qualified engineer, but do we have it tested by a qualified test pilot. An approved test pilot, yes, but is he or she actually qualified – I’ll leave you to answer that one.

5.

hear hear Old chap!

Sorry chaps, feel I must add my bit!!!

You need to be careful about the definition of a test pilot. A professional test pilot is exactly that…a graduate of a recognised test pilot school, just like a Flight Test Engineer is a graduate of a recognised test pilot and FTE school. A maintenance test pilot is an mtp…..an mtp has the job of testing an aircraft to ensure that it has been modified or ‘serviced’ correctly. MTP’s normally have a qualification in terms of type approval and knowing the ins and outs of check test flight schedules. To that end a post restoration flight can and should be conducted if at all possible by an mtp or the equivalent of. You want someone who is capable of flying the aircraft, hopefully knowing what one should fly and feel like so that he (or her) can fully check out the aircraft and systems. To that end a professional test pilot is not necessarily what you want. Put another way, a fixed wing test pilot can assess an aircraft against a role, tell you about handling, but may not be able to tell you if it flys like other examples of that aircraft type.

A true test pilot is specially trained to fly either fixed wing or rotary wing and tell you what is right and what is wrong with it. They often have high hours, but low experience on type. Sure they push boundaries and (often) define envelopes but this is not necessarily what you want! Accidents do happen in flight test, but it is certainly risk mitigation….just because an aircraft is new or an envelope is to be defined does not mean you cannot mitigate risks to the lowest possible level.

I too know many professional test pilots. Many of them fly warbirds. This is mainly because they have had an inroad to that part of flying. Professional test pilots can make good ‘mtp’ as they can bring another dimension to the first post maintenance/restoration flight. They also bring a good deal of risk assessment and mitigation to the flying.

Summed up, its horses for courses! If I had a spitty for test flying, I would use a high houred spit test pilot or Paul Day. Paul Day is not a test pilot graduate, however, there is no-one better qualified to conduct post restoration test flights.

Just two more things……test pilots are just part of a team….don’t forget the flight test engineers…..and the oldest and first test pilot and FTE school is ETPS at Boscombe Down…..’Learn to Test, Test to Learn’. Graduates of ETPS (and the other schools are justly proud of their profession and school).

Regards and sorry if I have bored anyone or everyone!

Canada TD