EGPF 081320Z 00000KT 0600 R23/0500 R05/0450 FZFG SKC
M03/M03 Q1020=
EGPF 081220Z 00000KT 0250 R23/0550 R05/0400 FZFG VV///
M04/M04 Q1021=
EGPF 081150Z 00000KT 0300 R23/P1500 R05/0325 FZFG VV///
M04/M04 Q1021=
Ren, your trip to GLA may be a waste of time – fecking freezing and foggy!
EGPF 081320Z 00000KT 0600 R23/0500 R05/0450 FZFG SKC
M03/M03 Q1020=
EGPF 081220Z 00000KT 0250 R23/0550 R05/0400 FZFG VV///
M04/M04 Q1021=
EGPF 081150Z 00000KT 0300 R23/P1500 R05/0325 FZFG VV///
M04/M04 Q1021=
Ren, your trip to GLA may be a waste of time – fecking freezing and foggy!
Stephen Grey flying TFC’s Hurricane at Old Warden (probably during its first display season, late 80s). After years of watching the BBMF’s conservative displays, to see the Hurricane superbly flown, in a fully aerobatic display, was a revelation.
Funny how things have changed, and the wisdom of such displays are being questioned.
If I knew the first thing about football, that would probably be funny.
If I knew the first thing about football, that would probably be funny.
WHO GIVES A TOSS?
WHO GIVES A TOSS?
Yes, irritating isn’t it?
Yes, irritating isn’t it?
Military aviation tends to dominate – what about a comprehensive history of UK airlines?
I’ve got the excellent ‘British Independent Airlines 1946-1976’ by A.C. Merton Jones (just buy it!) but that is only a small part of the story.
Speaking of Shacklady, the Morgan/Shacklady book ‘Spitfire – The History’ has my vote as one of my biggest book disappointments. The book is a VERY thorough technical history, but almost totally ignores the most important side of the story ie the in-service, human part of the history.
As the great Jeffrey Quill remarked in his lukewarm introduction, “It would be possible to criticise the book on the grounds that sometimes it tends to get bogged down under its own weight of detail and perhaps misses some of the broader interpretations.”
Too right Jeffrey.
Reading the posts, it looks like many of you are expecting a further report from the AAIB. I would suspect that this bulletin is the final and definitive word on the accident.
If the type was widely used in a public transport context, then a Formal Report would have been commissioned. As the Fairchild Bolingbroke (as the AAIB correctly call it) is irrelevant to public transport, I would imagine that this Bulletin is all that the AAIB will publish.
As several people have pointed out, the AAIB do NOT apportion blame, only attempts to establish facts. If you read the bulletin, it looks like they have.
I would imagine the rarity of the Bolingbroke makes any further investigation not to be worthwhile (in a purely financial sense)
Originally posted by David Burke
Lancman – I was always under the impression that the Blenheim was doing a ‘touch and go’ manouver at Denham so the issue of landing deep on the runway wasn’t really a factor.
Just because you are doing a touch and go, doesn’t mean that runway length is irrelevant. 24 at Denham has a LDA of 670m, compared with 1353m at Duxford (and,to give a silly comparison, 3048m at Stansted). So, Denham is pretty short and accuracy would likely to have been important.
Which I am glad to report he did towards the end of an epic three hour, 38 song show in Birmingham’s Symphony Hall on Friday night. Last night of the ‘North’ tour, and Elvis clearly didn’t want to go to bed!
http://www.elviscostello.info/setlists/031107.php
Which I am glad to report he did towards the end of an epic three hour, 38 song show in Birmingham’s Symphony Hall on Friday night. Last night of the ‘North’ tour, and Elvis clearly didn’t want to go to bed!
http://www.elviscostello.info/setlists/031107.php