dark light

WL747

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 388 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Engine fire or shadow? #1136409
    WL747
    Participant

    I don’t think so,as the cockpit is not in view.
    My reasoning was that he noticed the engine spewing oil,and thought that it would be a great shot. and at the moment he pressed the button. The plane he was in lost enough height to allow the shadow to fall at the exact point he was trying to get a pic of.

    If the engine was spewing oil, the event is finished… and I don’t believe there is enough divergence on the streak to be an oil leak.

    At altitude, I’d imagine hot aircraft oil streaming out would show a plume of vapour as well as the oil. Further more, wouldn’t any turbulence as the airflow from below and above the wing meet behind the trailing edge of the wing cause further divergence of a vapourising stream? I’d imagine that the same process would happen on the stbd elevator aerofoil section, causing a more rapid fade out of the ‘stain’.

    The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that it’s a shadow. Any darkening of the area may have been caused by post processing of the photo in the lab in order to make the under exposed sections stand out. Such under exposure may have been caused by a bright sunny day and metal reflective airframe, especially on an automatic camera!

    Would like to hear other ideas though!
    Scotty

    in reply to: Engine fire or shadow? #1137324
    WL747
    Participant

    Then presumably it was also manipulated to make the fuselage shadow much darker than where the shadow of the wing crosses the fuselage ahead of the dorsal turret.

    I wonder why?

    Moggy

    Moggy, it might be simple….

    The aircraft formation is presumably made up of all natural metal airframes which in bright sunlight will be highly reflective.

    The lighter shadow that Pagen darkened is likely lighter as it is reflecting sunlight back to the camera lens more from this area than the starboard side of the aircraft. That’s one explaination…
    Or… it could be the shadow of an aircraft higher than the one taking the photo, hence the difference in shadow intensity.

    Reflection is my best guess… Just going from what I know about photography However I do reckon Stbd inner has been a bit sooty too….

    Best Regards,
    Scotty

    in reply to: Flambards, Helston, planes. Where are they now? #1158940
    WL747
    Participant

    here is a pic of the flambards gannet which is now at davidstow,this was taken last year and it`s only one picture because the place was closed but the owner left the gate open for five minutes so i ran in and took the shot

    All the support trusses don’t instill confidence…. is the undercart ropey?

    Kind regards,
    Scotty

    in reply to: Latest Details Of Nimrod at Coventry #1091567
    WL747
    Participant

    That was ‘Project Anneka’ – the conversion of a MR.2 to R.1 using ‘666’ at Woodford as a source of spares.

    Cheers David – I wasn’t sure of the Anneka reference, but makes sense now.

    Kind Regards,
    Scotty

    in reply to: Latest Details Of Nimrod at Coventry #1091880
    WL747
    Participant

    There are three R.1s, and I thought (mistakingly!) that Cosford was getting one.
    If the forum is to be believed, East Midlands, Newark, and Duxford are getting them.
    Cosford must be getting an MR.2 which I haven’t heard of arriving yet, and I’m not sure how it will be delivered, flying to Shawbury and roaded from there seems most obvious way.
    So maybe one more flight after the Coventry delivery?

    Yes, Pagen, that’s right – there was only three R.1’s originally, but after XW666 ditched in the Moray Firth sometime in 1995, I gather there was an MR.2 converted to a close R.1 standard, entering service in 1996. I may be wrong, and will be happy to be corrected…

    Kind Regards,
    Scotty

    in reply to: Help in Saving Trident 1C G-ARPO #1114662
    WL747
    Participant

    Off topic but, that Cockpit doesn’t look damaged enough to kill all the Deck crew. Something fishy methinks.

    If you know anything about Kai Tak – you’ll know that going off the runway is likely to mean going into water – the flight crew drowned…. maybe that’s where the fishy smell is coming from.

    I remember a newspaper article at the time with the wreckage being lifted out of the harbour…..

    in reply to: Nimrod retirement today – please add pictures #1130826
    WL747
    Participant

    I have an almost identical shot of WL756 making it’s final approach in Jun 91…

    RIP Nimrod.

    Would love to see that one Nick….

    in reply to: XM603 Update #1134407
    WL747
    Participant

    That is a fair point, but I’m on of the people that belive machines have a soul, so to me, it is a dog 😀

    I do hear you in your point though, I suppose that its somewhat necessary for one to die to save lots of others.

    I’ve heard that quote from a film somewhere before….

    Sorry, I’ve worked on enough aircraft, bits of aircraft and other machines to know they don’t have souls – it’s all just engineering….. but I do know they can be bloody awkward at times, you’d swear they had personalities….

    Kind Regards.
    Scotty

    in reply to: Nimrod retirement today – please add pictures #1136056
    WL747
    Participant

    STV news have just reported on the Nimrod retiral service that was held at Kinloss today. Last flight on Wednesday, then of course the post service delivery flights….

    Kind of sad, they were a regular visitor to Aberdeen Airport, doing missed approaches / overshoots.

    Sorry Pagen, I was under the impression you were in the RAF……

    in reply to: Nimrod retirement today – please add pictures #1136522
    WL747
    Participant

    Pagen,

    Nothing in the local news up here about Nimrod retiral, apart from an article in last nights’s paper saying still on track for 31st March end. But you being in the RAF, I am positive you’ll know more…..;)
    I’ll keep an eye out for any articles….

    It is a sad event….

    in reply to: XM603 Update #1136973
    WL747
    Participant

    Put the girl to rest before she worsens, its cruel.

    :confused:

    It’s a machine, not a dog – a machine which at the moment is still serving a purpose, in helping to keep one Vulcan airborne and will eventually help preserve others.

    Best just let it serve its final purpose, then scrap what remains. Other than the colour scheme, she’s not that unique otherwise, best concentrate on the other Vulcans it can save.

    in reply to: Nimrod Museum Allocations #1141923
    WL747
    Participant

    No Nimrods in the RAF museum system? Are you serious!? That’s a total travesty in my book if it’s true… as is retiring them early, to be honest.

    Richard

    Retiring them too early??? Erm, the airframes are 40 years old…. They are genuine museum pieces already….. just the gear inside isn’t ancient…

    in reply to: Some aircraft wrecks around Moray, Scotland #1142660
    WL747
    Participant

    Thanks for the comments – I dont know why it’s hard to get – it’s still in print, and still available – I should know, I publish it!

    Oh, and by the way – Amazon have never even ordered ONE copy from us!

    That’s nice to know Graham – I’m impressed with the book, it’s pretty well written. Jim Hughes is quite a knowledgeable guy…

    Cheers!
    Scotty

    in reply to: Nimrod Museum Allocations #1142662
    WL747
    Participant

    Yup, that’s what the news in NE Scotland is saying… total withdrawal – the gap in time is going to be used to train the crews for MRA.4 operations

    in reply to: XM603 Update #1145061
    WL747
    Participant

    Cheers, that should put an end to comments about what is happening to XM603 being ‘cruel’

    You either have a flying Vulcan, or a White static one – I think that is a no brainer then….

    Not nice, but essential if people want to see XH558 continue to fly..

    Kind Regards,
    Scotty

Viewing 15 posts - 196 through 210 (of 388 total)