Hi Halifax,
I,like you,would love to see ‘337 placed in a building she could be rolled into and out of,but there are always limiting factors with these things, like planning permission,finances and/or the size of the site in general.From what I recall,the site where 337 is being resored is not a large one,and a larger building would therefore take up a large proportion of the museum’s land,which is currently used for displaying other exhibits.I think they are in a position whre they can’t have thier cake and eat it.
To look on the bright side,she won’t be ‘entombed’ within the building in the same way as the Vulcan at the RAF Museum.A Halifax, as you probably already know,breaks down into numerous major sections,so it’s not impossible that she could be dismantled and moved again sometime in the future.Whilst there is the handicap of not being able to move the aircraft in the case of fire,I would suggest that it would be pretty tricky to move her in such a situation anyway.When the CWH hangar fire occurred a few years ago,the guys had to wait hours before the fire crews would let them into thier own hangar to retrieve the Lanc,and that was only because the fire was no longer threatening that area,so it’s not just a matter of having a door to push it through.
With regards to engine runs,I would say it is a very slim possibility that the engines on 337 would ever be run anyway.The Herc is a complex beast and there are seemingly no serviceable parts for them,so even if she had the space for engine runs,she wouldn’t be able to make use of it.

I don’t mean to bug you Galdri,but I have to pick up on one or two points from your last post…

“Ok…..I do not have the complete report at hand at the moment. From what I remember the pilot landed long. My english is failing me at the moment as I can not remember the correct word for what exactly what it was that he hit. I thought it was a some kind of a drainage ditch by side of the runway. Anyway he hit soft ground on one side of the runway that turned the aircraft over. Maybe he stayed within the boundaries of the runway, but he was not where he should have been. There for I classicified it as loosing directional control.”

The aircraft remained on the runway and was where it should’ve been when it flipped over.I think the drainage thing you’re thinking of is to do with the technique the runway mainatanence guys used to try and keep that end of the runway drained.They used a tiller of sorts,which cut channels through the turf about 6-inches underground,and a few inches apart.If you took a slice through the earth you’d see something that looked like a sheet of paper from a notepad,with lots of perforations at the top.A similar thing is used on football pitches.So,to sum up,the aircraft WAS on the runway,and hadn’t overshot or veered off it.I’m sorry to be so pedantic,but I feel it’s important that blame is not laid on the pilot whose name and reputation was known and respected by many.

“It strikes me as very stupid to fly below minimum control speed (Vmca) on final. These guy’s are flying into airfields of more than ample length, so what is the use of slowing down to final approach speed (Vref) many miles out on finals and go below Vmca? The standard teaching in my neck of the woods is “never go below Vmca until landing is assured”. Why should it be any different in the UK? You never know when the phonies are going to quit on you, country is irrelevant in this argument.”

The characteristics of many vintage twins means that they CANNOT land the aircraft above Vmca,or take off for that matter.It is common practice on many of them to keep the nose down after take off so as to reach Vmca as quickly as possible.Going below Vmca before landing simply can’t be helped,it’s a limitation of the aircraft’s performance,and not a choice by the pilot/crew.

With regard to somebody’s suggestion of putting telemetry systems on warbirds for ‘pit crew’ to moniter,this is already being trialled.The recently restored Spit XIV RN201 has a telemetry system fitted so as various performance data can be analysed.I think this is as yet limited to plugging a laptop into the aircraft after landing,or during ground runs,but the long term intention is to make the information available in real time to an observer on the ground.

Went to the second Military Pageant at OW during the summer,and it was my first visit to OW.Personally,I couldn’t fault it-brilliant weather,lovely aircraft,decent facilities etc.Me and my ‘bruvver’ brought along our own nosh and just sat back and enjoyed the day.
I can only comment on that particular display,but when I went to the toilets at 6pm-ish they were pretty decent,streets and streets better than the portaloos we usually have to put up with! I can only assume the chap above was talking about Mildenhall.I even thought things at OW were a little better than Duxford-sorry all you DX people!
I can understand a few people feeling that there isn’t enough catering on site,but as some have suggested,bringing your own and making a picnic of it is probably the best idea anyway.
I’ll definately be back to OW next year,hopefully several times! 🙂

I think perhaps the key issue in all of this ‘aero’s or no aero’s’ discussion is not whether these machines should be looped and rolled or whatever.Something like a Spit or Corsair is perfectly capable of these,and I have no concerns seeing aircraft like these doing these sorts of manouvres.
The one thing I do wonder about,though,is aerobatic routines,ie a whole series of manouvres strung together.There have been cases,both in warbirds and eslewhere,where aircraft have crashed as a result of a build-up of mistakes during a routine,eg the speed not quite being high enough on display entry,slightly too slow at top of first loop,fatally slow at top of second.In most warbirds,once speed (or ‘energy’) is lost it can be very difficult to regain the lost momentum-you can’t just throw the throttle open and expect the aircraft to give you those few missing miles an hour on demand. That kind of luxury is sadly only reserved for the purpose built aerobatic machines and the modern jet fighters,with thier extreme agility and very high thrust to wieght ratios.I remember reading an article on flying a P51 display by Cliff Spink,who stated how critical it was to enter into the display at the correct speed (around 350mph),and fly each manouvre precisely,otherwise you’d simply run out of ‘puff’ towards the end of the routine.
So,my basic point is that perhaps aero’s ought to be performed occasionally as part of a flatter display,rather than there being a whole 5 minutes of rolling and looping etc.

Good to see you all had a great time.Apologies for my non-appearance,I spent the Saturday evening with a bunch of old mates I hadn’t seen for a year or two,so I was in no fit state to travel next morning! 🙁
I’ll be at the Christmas one,promise,promise,promise…

Done