WH904I fear that it will be a pretty dull celebration. I wasn’t even born when the magnificent Coronation Review took place at Odiham (what a spectacle that must have been), and I missed the Review at Abingdon. I saw the marvellous Jubilee Review at Finningley though and the equally-impressive BofB50 flypast over London (and a rehearsal over Wittering). The Anniversary Review at Marham in 1993 was ruined by bad weather but the rehearsal flypast was impressive, even though it was smaller than the 1977 celebration. I particularly liked the concept of each formation approaching from a different direction – it made the flypast all the more entertaining. I didn’t bother going to see the 80th Anniversary event because it was too small to bother making the trip!
I guess the 100th Anniversary will be marked by something pretty tame. I can’t see how it could be anything other than dull, given that the RAF is now a mere shadow of its former self. I suppose a large formation of Typhoons is possible, but I’m guessing that even 16 would be an achievement. Maybe the same could be done with Hawks but beyond that, there’s nothing that could be done to provide a real spectacle. A static display would be pretty grim – the number of units or the number of aircraft types yields a pretty meagre list these days.
I suppose the realistic outcome will be a “special event” at RIAT (Fairford), comprising of a group of static aircraft and a collection of museum exhibits, gathered together to illustrate the RAF’s history. I imagine that the air display will feature something similar. So there will doubtless be plenty to see but nothing particularly thrilling. It’s inevitable really – there’s nothing left to show the public!
WH904Just to update – the distribution problems appear to have been addressed, and the next edition in the series (F-4 Phantom) is now going on sale 🙂
WH904Well good luck with the Hangar 3 project – it would be very satisfying to see even more of the NAM collection under cover. I’ll leave concerns over toilets and cafes to someone else I think! 🙂
WH904Hope the new facilities spring up soon, so that attention can be turned to the creation of another hangar. Nice though any new facilities might be, the most important thing is preservation of the aircraft, so anything that gets more of the collection under cover would be a great step. I guess a hangar is a rather more ambitious project when compared to a cafe though 🙂
WH904Simply, what commercial aviation?
I don’t know. Wait and see I guess 🙂
WH904As I said before, I think it’s the most likely outcome. Might not be anything spectacular, but it seems far more likely than demolition, housing, etc. Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if most of the domestic and technical site is retained by MoD (and used by Lakenheath) and the airfield is assigned to commercial aviation of some sort. Even if (as has been said) Marshalls have to interest in the site, I’m sure others will.
WH904I agree. Like all of the great air shows, they slowly lost their appeal as the number/diversity of the participating aircraft dwindled. It’s sad, but at the same time I guess those of us who were lucky enough to see all the good shows should be thankful. The youngsters who salivate at the thought of RIAT 2015 really have no idea what they missed, bless ’em 🙂
WH904I think we’d all hoped that Air Fete might have returned one day.
Not all of us. Some of us acknowledged a long time ago that Air Fete was dead and buried. If a show of any sort had been restored it would have been a parody of the old Air Fete events. Times have changed and all of the aircraft that made Air Fete great are long gone. Those that are left are few and far between and from this dwindling resource there are very few that are authorised to display to the public. So what would “Air Fete 2015” have looked like? It would have been pretty disappointing, even if it had ever been a plausible idea. A “new” Air Fete was never going to happen and even if it had, it would have been dull as dishwater.
As for Mildenhall’s future, I guess we just have to wait and see. I would think it unlikely that such a huge airfield with such good facilities would be abandoned completely, so perhaps it has some sort of aviation-related future. I also wonder whether the USAF will abandon all links with the base – One has to wonder if there is enough technical and domestic support infrastructure to support Lakenheath without at least part of Mildenhall. I suppose there is a risk that the site might simply become another housing complex but maybe the residents of the local area are bright enough to know that without the airfield, their local economy is going to take a beating, so it would probably be in their interest to keep the base active somehow. I wonder how long it will be before some MP suggests developing it into another “London” airport?! 🙂
WH904I just came across this thread. I’m saddened to read that G-ATIG was destroyed at Norwich. I also have very fond memories of the aircraft’s time with Brymon. I used to spend a lot of time at RAF St.Mawgan and G-ATIG was a very familiar sight and sound. I can still hear the shrill whistle of those engines as she taxied out from the airport dispersal. What shame that she’s gone the way of so many other great aeroplanes 🙁
WH904I did a bit of investigation by looking at the available scale drawings. Problem is that (like all scale plans) they are artist interpretations, so one can’t place too much faith in their accuracy. But as far as I can determine, the drawings suggest that the Hastings and Halifax wings and inboard engine position are identical, but outboard of that engine the Hastings wing adopts a sharper taper which increases still further outboard of the outer engine – and incorporates a longer span outer wing too. That seems to be it in essence, but it’s hard to determine if the engines are indeed in precisely the same positions on both aircraft. I guess all of the previous posts do at least confirm that the old story of the Hastings having the same wing as the Halifax certainly wasn’t true!
WH904Struggling a bit with measuring at Newark – is it still required? 😮
I’d certainly be interested to know if this issue has been resolved. The question of how the Hastings wing (and engine placement) differs from the Halifax is one that has floated around for years, and yet there doesn’t seem to be a reliable answer.
WH904The mountain of copies in Tesco in Cambridge has vanished
Good to hear – must have sold very quickly then if they’ve already gone 🙂
We’re still trying to sort-out the circulation on the Jaguar issue – Tescos seem to have beaten WH Smiths hands down. It’s a mystery why this has happened though but hopefully all will be sorted before the next Icons edition goes on sale in a couple of weeks or so 🙂
WH904Mike/Moggy – I’m quite sure that no supermarket has a “mountain” of any magazine edition. Distribution doesn’t work like that. If you don’t happen to like the Kelsey/Key bookazines, then perhaps you might like to explain why? I’m sure that we’d all be more than willing to respond to views and criticism, but oblique comments that infer criticism (but say nothing of any value) don’t help you or us.
As for Canopener’s posts, I’m not quite sure what he’s trying to say. I’m quite sure there are mistakes here and there, but then there are always mistakes in every book and every magazine on every subject. The best that one can do is to work hard to avoid them. In the case of the Jaguar edition, I wrote the material myself and I worked hard to create an interesting and readable account of the Jaguar within the space available. I think we produced a very good publication (which has been very well received) but if it wasn’t as good as he expected, then I’m sorry that he was disappointed.
But I would of course appreciate any thoughts from readers, as the Icons series can only continue to improve if we have a better understanding of precisely what readers want to see – or don’t want to see.
WH904Not reticent David, just unwilling to waste people’s time on point scoring. If you seriously want to know, go find out 🙂
WH904David – we’ve been down this path before. I don’t want to bore other readers with unnecessary repetition. The story of XT597’s departure from Boscombe Down is well known, so if you’re genuinely interested, find out for yourself.
Every aircraft is at risk of being scrapped when it is withdrawn and/or sold. I would have thought that was obvious.
As for Everett, well obviously they bought it in expectation of re-selling it. But they haven’t sold it. Again, this is self-evident.
Thunderbird – the “powers that be” are ignoring it. That’s patently obvious. The BP111 is already in a museum. Everett are simply conducting their business, nothing wrong with that. Point is, it should never have got to the stage that it was available for purchase by Everett. But having reached that stage, it’s very sad that RAFM have showed no interest in at least talking to Everett to see if XT597 could be recovered at a reasonable cost. Basically, they have no interest in XT597. Yes, Hendon has a Phantom but we’ve discussed this previously. XT597 is more than just another Phantom as explained. As for the Dornier, well that’s all well and good. I’m sure lots of people find the wreckage fascinating. But that’s not the point. The point is that it has nothing to do with the RAF… or at least if we’re to claim that it has, then XT597 is even more directly connected… which is where I came in I think! 🙂
Sign In
