Page 43 – Key Publishing

Mark V

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 631 through 645 (of 2,768 total)

← 1 2 3 … 42 43 44 … 183 184 185 →

Author

Posts
November 29, 2009 at 4:27 pm in reply to: Spitfire IX Spinner #1125435

Mark V
Participant

No – mine was the removeable spinner cone only.

This would bring the measurements nearer the Monforton dims. I estimate the backplate to be approx 1.5″/2″.

John

Closer to 2″ but would need to check – it does seem to be around an inch larger (at its rearmost, widest dia.) in diameter than the removeable spinner.

November 28, 2009 at 11:15 pm in reply to: Spitfire IX Spinner #1125926

Mark V
Participant

Thanks again for your trouble gentlemen. So to be totally retentive, I take it that the Spinner cone is 24″ long with a Dia of 24″. Inclusive of backplate measured on two examples.

John

No – mine was the removeable spinner cone only.

While everyone has their measuring tapes out can anyone clarify the Mk1 and Mk11 spinner sizes.

Mk.XI – same as Mk.IX: 24″ x 24″.

November 27, 2009 at 11:41 pm in reply to: Spitfire IX Spinner #1126612

Mark V
Participant

Mine’s 24″ X 24″ not including backplate; but hey size ain’t everything right?

Yup – same as the one I checked today.

November 27, 2009 at 9:11 am in reply to: Spitfire IX Spinner #1127222

Mark V
Participant

I appreciate that this all might seem a little anal but Spitfires always raise anti when it comes to kit dimensions and there are several threads on the subject running elsewhere.

Hardly anal, quite normal for here actually! I can also get one on a bench today and check the dimensions to add to the data pool.

November 26, 2009 at 10:40 am in reply to: Twilight Tear #1128297

Mark V
Participant

Does anyone know how the restoration is going in the us ? must be fairly advanced by now also does anyone know how TFC are getting along with the CAA audit ?

In answer to your first question – it looked finished and ready to tow out and fly in the last pictures I saw of it (probably a month or so ago).

November 25, 2009 at 6:10 pm in reply to: Sea Fury WJ288 (The thread that will not die) #1129312

Mark V
Participant

To me its such a shame that the original powerplants in Sea Furies are substituted for more exotic engines, but at least they are still flying.

Yes it is a shame – but most of the people who operate them with the Wright engine would consider the Centaurus to be the ‘exotic’ one!

November 25, 2009 at 3:57 pm in reply to: Sea Fury WJ288 (The thread that will not die) #1129419

Mark V
Participant

Is this a world record for thread revival? (over six years) 😮

Anyway – I cunningly used Google to find this http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:0YNOaKDjx5oJ:warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php%3Ft%3D9040+sea+fury+wj288&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

November 24, 2009 at 9:56 am in reply to: Spitfire Ground Crew #1130897

Mark V
Participant

Who would he answer to the Squadron Ldr or flt commanders?

As a Senior NCO he would answer to the Squadron’s Engineering Officer.

November 19, 2009 at 11:32 pm in reply to: How To Try And List A Building? #1134592

Mark V
Participant

At the risk of going off topic, modern work can certainly be listed and I know an architect in Liverpool who has had one of his own buildings listed, which means even he, the designer, can’t make major alterations!

How flattering for him 🙂 Listed status really means it cannot be altered without consent. In reality if consent is obtained for example, for an extension to a listed dwelling, you can carry out the works VAT free. Of course if you just wish to repair or maintain said listed structure VAT is charged at the standard rate :rolleyes:

November 19, 2009 at 6:52 pm in reply to: How To Try And List A Building? #1134999

Mark V
Participant

Note the words ‘locations’ because most airfield structures will be seen as ‘modern’ therefor will not be considered, however the events which once took place at the location may be considered the reason for listed status.

Buildings for listing are considered on their history and merit. Having been constructed in the 20th century does not preclude their considreration for listed building status. if that was the case The Twentieth Century Society would be marching on Whitehall!

The rest is good advice though 🙂

November 16, 2009 at 5:11 pm in reply to: Spitfire MK.1/11 Propellors #1137748

Mark V
Participant

DH two-speed

These were, of course, metal props.

November 16, 2009 at 5:09 pm in reply to: Supermarine Walrus to fly.. fantastic. #1137755

Mark V
Participant

if any of you know me from roundwood please get in touch. i now live in spain.

I remember you very well John – Private Message (PM) sent 🙂

November 11, 2009 at 7:40 pm in reply to: If No "Dambusters",What Could Be Made? #1142017

Mark V
Participant

I liked the idea of the following of a group of pilots for 10 episodes, obv america has the money, so maybe if there were a few guys in an eagle squadron together, fighting the BOB, raids across france, supporting bombers, hoping across europe with the advance, that kind of thing, real aircraft, real stories a more everyday tribute to airmen.

We did get ‘A Piece of Cake’ 21 years ago, although that was restricted to Battle of France & Battle of Britain.

November 10, 2009 at 11:05 pm in reply to: Dambusters Remake Cancelled/Delayed? #1142935

Mark V
Participant

You might have the best films stunts/CGI ever, but without the above, you end up with Flyboys or Pearl Harbo(u)r.

A.

Good point Andy.

November 10, 2009 at 9:29 pm in reply to: Dambusters Remake Cancelled/Delayed? #1143061

Mark V
Participant

There’s a clip on youtube, also a link in ‘Forum theatre’ here, which shows spits and mosquitos and the feeling is it’s all CG.

That piece of film was indeed CGI, not made by a major studio I gather either. Its a few years old now so the same task put to a highly budgeted studio for a major movie would (hopefully) be even better today.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 631 through 645 (of 2,768 total)

← 1 2 3 … 42 43 44 … 183 184 185 →