dark light

Mark V

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,531 through 1,545 (of 2,768 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: FLYING LEGENDS 2006 #1333569
    Mark V
    Participant

    There’s at least 2 on your list that are unlikely to be there though…..

    I know – but I am not biting 😀

    in reply to: FLYING LEGENDS 2006 #1333591
    Mark V
    Participant

    I was really talking about the reality of the next few weeks in the context of there being seven aircraft announced for the show, rather than potentialy airworthy aircraft.

    in reply to: FLYING LEGENDS 2006 #1333602
    Mark V
    Participant

    7 P-51 Mustangs where will they come from never knew we had 7 P-51 Mustangs in europe.James

    You are rather adept at displaying your ignorance sometimes James. There are seven flyable Mustangs in England alone 🙂 :

    TFC x 2
    RACo x 1
    Hangar 11 x 1
    OFMC x 1
    Rob Davies x 1
    Maurice Hammond x 1

    Not counting Robs Lamplough’s ‘Miss Helen’ (still undergoing repairs).

    in reply to: sea Fury Project #1334444
    Mark V
    Participant

    No, the Thompson bird is not a dual control and has a -3350 up front as I recall. Maybe this is the Greenhill airplane?

    Ex Greenhill.

    in reply to: Latest News on "Dambusters" remake #1335422
    Mark V
    Participant

    I find it somewhat hard to believe that they could keep six replicas a secret..(are there 24 Merlins available?) what are your opinions about this rumor??

    Please read my earlier post :rolleyes: They have not commenced construction of these ‘replicas’. They will be for a movie, these will be movie props to perform specific movie functions and not necessarily, made of metal, be full size, be powered by Merlins etc.

    in reply to: Latest News on "Dambusters" remake #1335675
    Mark V
    Participant

    I agree with Airgage – take notice of BeaufighterVI’s post. Anyone dismissing the possibility off a DB re-make is likely to be proven wrong in the not to distant future.

    Also spare a thought to the magnitude of movie funding compared to what we are used to in the world of historic aircraft. If six full size replica Lancs are needed the film set dressing world will produce these in double quick time I assure you. I agree that flyable reproductions are a big further step and would anticipate a combination of large and full size replica static/trundling replicas coupled with CGI and the use of one or two of the flyable aircraft. Movie makers are very adept at using highly convincing combinations of effects to get the images they need, some of which can be really quite simple but effective as anyone who saw the ‘flat’ Dakotas at North Weald (and then saw them in the completed footage) during the making of ‘Band of Brothers’ will testify.

    Start to think about the technical aspects of this project from the viewpoint of a 21st century film-maker such as Peter Jackson, rather than a historic aircraft enthusiast and you will begin to see what may be possible.

    in reply to: Spitfire P9374 #1336212
    Mark V
    Participant

    ‘Oldest flying Spitfire’ could actually be redefined as actually being airworthy for the longest period. Clearly anything that crashed in 1940 is likely to have flown only a couple of years !

    Surely that would be ‘Longest flying Spitfire’?

    in reply to: What's in the box? #1336214
    Mark V
    Participant

    Now can we get this thread locked or moved as it has nothing to do with historic avaition.

    I agree – this sort of thing should be in ‘General Discussion’, I am all for humour but this has no place in ‘Historic’ in my opinion.

    in reply to: B.o.B. Lanc this evening #1252647
    Mark V
    Participant

    Cheers James, saved me writing a long post!

    in reply to: Spitfire P9374 #1252762
    Mark V
    Participant

    With technollegy the way it is a complete new build is not impossible.

    I agree and to a large extent it has already been done, in the late 1980’s. I would say its not really a question of if it can be done but ‘should’ it be done. I think the answer to the latter is, considering ecconomic matters, probably not.

    To construct a Spitfire from scratch would firstly require the CAA to agree to ‘new build’ construction and I am not sure how helpful they would be. It would be too heavy for PFA certification and could not fit in to the ‘Permit to Fly’ catergory as it would not strictly be an ex-military aircraft. More importantly, who would spend £800 to £1m (perhaps more) to create a history lacking ‘replica’ that would be worth rather less than that and certainly a lot less than an ‘original’?

    These are the reasons that Spitfires are ‘re-built’ from sometimes scant remains, rather than a perceived or actual lack of ability to build from scratch.

    in reply to: FLYING LEGENDS 2006 #1252978
    Mark V
    Participant

    Would have hoped the Kennet Seafire

    Thats already on the list.

    in reply to: SX336 first public outing at Shuttleworth #1255118
    Mark V
    Participant

    On the subject of a re-enactment at VL, haven,t they moved to the same date as L—–s?

    Yes they have 😮

    in reply to: B.o.B. Lanc this evening #1256890
    Mark V
    Participant

    I don’t know anything about the rules of keeping an aircraft in the air so a “possible” stupid question coming.

    There is no such thing as a ‘stupid’ question 🙂

    So the rules are “regardless of the age of the flying machine then these are the rules and it’s right across the board”.

    Pretty much (as far as ‘simple’ Permit to Fly aircraft are concerned anyway), most of the historic aircraft we enjoy today (the Spitfire , Hurricane, Mustang etc) do not have a finite airframe life, but their status as airworthy machines is maintained by a series of detailed inspections of various levels of complexity throughout the year coupled with (flying) time related prop and engine overhauls.

    I had heard it had something to do with the main spar but didn’t know that this particular part of the aircraft could be changed. Sounds like big job but with the Lanc it’s worth it.

    Yes it is a very big job but the Lanc as an airframe is made from a number of different ‘sub-assemblies’ and the main spar is a large part of the central fuselage/inner wing sub-assembly so it is possible to break the spar down and replace the sheet metal components and fixings. And yes, it does deserve it!

    Once these are used up????? Are there only a limited amount from original stock? Surely with todays modern toys in manufacturing more could be made?

    The spar is more of a built-up assembly than an individual part, so it can be replaced so long as the raw material, bults and rivets are still available.

    Mark V
    Participant

    “The CO’s Query” 😉

    Indeed – original 32 Sqdn markings. Colours and roundels look good too 😀

    in reply to: B.o.B. Lanc this evening #1257701
    Mark V
    Participant

    I heard somewhere that it only has a limited amount of flight hours left on that aircraft and then it will be grounded. Any truth in that?

    Ali

    Not really. The Lancasters flying time is governed by the ‘life’ allocated to the main spar. This ran out of hours a few years ago and the structure was replaced allowing many more flying hours. Once these are used up (in many years time) the spar can be replaced again.

    In common with all other aircraft the engines and props are also required to be overhauled after a certain number of flying hours but this is common to all aircraft and not something which is particular to PA474.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,531 through 1,545 (of 2,768 total)