dark light

Ant.H

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,816 through 1,830 (of 2,663 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Spitfire XVI #2112874
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Cheers Geoff,
    Top notch info as always. 😎

    “Did you spot the huge clanger dropped by the film’s makers in the above list? 92 sqdn Spitfires carrying 501 sqdn codes!!!”

    Erm,shouldn’t that be 242Sqn Hurricanes carrying 501Sqn’s ‘SD- ‘ codes?? Any ideas why they painted the Hurri’s up with those markings instead of the correct ‘LE- ‘ codes?

    in reply to: Spitfire XVI #2112890
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Blimey Geoff,I ddin’t realise there was so much information available on the aircraft used in Reach for the Sky!You wouldn’t happen to know what wreck was used in the Bulldog crash scene would you?It looks very realistic and very much like a Bulldog.It’s perhaps a bit ironic that it looks a bit like G-ABBB after her crash at Farnborough a few years later 🙁

    in reply to: Concorde complaint to BA #2113005
    Ant.H
    Participant

    As far as I know,the AF Concordes had different tyres anyway, BA have tyres made by Dunlop,and AF by a French company,so it’s possible that BA’s tyres wouldn’t have behaved in the same way in a similar incident.

    in reply to: Spitfire XVI #2113018
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Cheers Geoff,
    That’s definately the one I remember from the Abongdon show. 🙂
    I have a vague memory of seeing TB382 aswell during the time it wore those BofB colours,and I remember I spent ages arguing with my brother about whether it was a real one or not-I win! I can’t remember which show it was at,but think it might have been a Biggin show about 10 years back.
    Thanks again Geoff,killed two birds with one stone there…

    in reply to: Best Preserved Lightning??? (fighter jet not prop) #2113065
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Well,my vote has to go the F.53 at Tangmere.It’s had it’s wings and fin chopped and rejoined,but otehr than that it’s in amazing nick.You could eat yer dinner off the undercarriage bays!

    in reply to: Spitfire XVI #2113068
    Ant.H
    Participant

    I can’t give you a positive ID,but I think the one you’re talking about is the one I saw at the BofB At Home display at Abingdon in 1990.It was marked up as ‘QV- ‘ (can’t remember individual code letter), which were apparently the markings it wore for the making of ‘Reach For The Sky’,the movie about Bader made back in 50’s,or so the info board in front of it said.

    in reply to: Shackelton for sale……again! #2113356
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Hi Der,
    Aeroplane published a pic of the two Cyprus Shacks just last month,and they are not a pretty sight.I can’t imagine that anything will come of them now,except perhaps dog food tins as you suggest…:(

    in reply to: Few pics from Norwich #2113842
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Interesting pictures Andrew,thanks.Interesting to see the Hunter fitted with a Recce nose.

    in reply to: Memphis Belle #2113906
    Ant.H
    Participant

    “Lancman
    that opening titles score sounds flippin’ wonderful through your home cinema speakers!!! “

    It certainly does-sounds even better coming through the Hi-Fi!I can recommend the movie soundtrack CD for anyone who enjoyed the movie’s score,and it also has a good mix of the old swing music which appears only briefly in the film.Got a copy for under a tenner-bargain!

    “When you smile at me,I hear gypsy violins,when u dance with me,I’m in heaven…”

    in reply to: CAF Wildcat Crash #2114400
    Ant.H
    Participant

    What a bummer :(. My condolances to the friends and relatives of the pilot,and to all those at the CAF. This is a bad end to a bad airshow season.

    in reply to: Shackelton for sale……again! #2114409
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Hi Bruce,
    That’s the opposite of what I’d heard.My understanding of it is that the re-spar of the Lanc was made possible by the fact that the same job had been done on the RAF’s Shack AEW.2’s in the early 80’s.This would mean that the Shacks were good for a few decades of flying.That’s what I’ve heard anyway…

    in reply to: Science Museum:Shorts SC.1 XG900 #2114589
    Ant.H
    Participant

    “Dhfan
    The museum is now so aimed at kids with interactive features and words of one syllable we lost interest very quickly and left after a couple of hours. The flight gallery had a show for kids with a couple of idiot presenters every 40 minutes or so. Didn’t finish looking there either.”

    I agree there is a fair amount of ‘kiddy content’,but overall it wasn’t too bad.At a guess,I would say that you went during a school holiday,which is when alot of museums run special ‘children’s workshops’ or whatever to keep them entertained for a while.I didn’t see much of that today,save one guy in a fake spacesuit in the space gallery making an ass of himself. 😀

    in reply to: Science Museum:Shorts SC.1 XG900 #2114616
    Ant.H
    Participant

    …both the Lockheed and the 504 are conventionally dangled,and I have to say that the Lockheed has been very well done,it’s probably the least messed about with of all the suspended airframes I’ve seen.
    By the way,the viewing balconies on eitehr side of the hall have glass/plastic panels which go up about 8ft,so you can’t really take decent pictures of stacked or dangled exhibits from above.Some interesting stuff in the display cabinets up there though,including an original Supermarine wind tunnel model of what became the Scimitar.
    Here’s the Avro…

    Ant.H
    Participant

    Hi Flood,
    What I should’ve said was ‘this is the second Gloster Whittle,W4041/G”.Strange how a missing comma can make things look!I wasn’t suggesting there’d been another with the same serial.
    Camera equipment?Well,not much really.Didn’t even take a bag with me!I just had a small Olympus pocket digi-cam,nothing fancy.
    You might have noticed that I didn’t use flash-this is because I tried it a couple of times and it ended up looking like a picture of something at Hendon,ie the immediate foreground bright as day,and the background in total darkness,so i gave up and tried relying on natural light.The little viewing screen on the back of my camera also gives a very bright picture,giving the impression that the picture had come out better than it actually has on the screen here.I think I should’ve rethought the flash thing,particularly in that head on shot of the SE5.

    in reply to: G-VFWE 2004 #2114626
    Ant.H
    Participant

    Hi Neil, thanks for the info,I had no idea Abingdon has that much usage made of it.Two events in two weeks,eh?Looks like i’ll have to get in my sister’s good books 😀

Viewing 15 posts - 1,816 through 1,830 (of 2,663 total)