I honestly can’t decide on one particular favourite,but the Fw190 surelly has to take the prize for the most capable and versatile fighter the Lufwaffe posessed.Even if it isn’t exactly a picturesque design,I reckon it’s purposeful appearance reflects it’s workmanlike adaptability.
For looks I think I’d go for a late G model 109 or perhaps the Me262 (if jets are allowed).
It would certainly have been ‘interesting’ if the 190 had been available in the Battle of Britain,but thankfully Focke-Wulf were still having horrendous problems regulating engine temperatures at the time,having ditched the original ducted spinner idea and gone for the compressor-like fan in the front cowling ring.It’s worth noting that the 190 faced cancellation right up into 1942 when the A3 models finally sorted the engine temperature problems,so it would have been far too immature to have been introduced in time for the Battle of Britain-and thank christ for that!

I would reckon that it’s highly unlikely that she’d end up at Duxford,being as short of indoor space as they are,and lacking in runway length.Add to this the fact that they already have a static example,and as we all know,the IWM aren’t ones for displayed multiple examples of the same types (hence the old Comet 2 getting the chop in favour of the Comet 4.)I would reckon that somewhere like Elvingdon would be a better home for her,or perhaps she could even remain at Brunty if the facilities are upgraded and the aircraft are made more accessable etc etc. It would be grand to keep her paired up with a Victor if at all possible.
As for the prospect of her flying again in the first place,I don’t want to be a pesimist,but it does look ever more likely to me that she’ll not fly again.Sorry :(.
As for the IWM only being concerned with the AAM,I disagree.The new superhanger extension is intended to house purelly British and Commonwealth aircraft,so in no way would I say that the IWM are dismissing British aviation heritage.It’s true that the British aircraft in the collection had seemingly been abandoned in recent years,but thier turn for attention is just around the corner.
I’d also say that Duxford’s shows aren’t tedious or repetitive, unlike Lancman’s criticisms of the venue! (Oooooooh,below the belt! 😮 lol Sorry Lancman,but I really do disagree with what you say.)

Here’s the second pic…

Nice pics ChinaClipper,thanks for those 🙂 Her restorers seem to have gone to a heck of alot of trouble to get things absolutely authentic,she looks great!
I’ve had second thoughts about that Polish machine being a Wilga,as I’ve realised that the Pole also built a copy of the russian Yak-12 called the PZL Gawron ,and this is also a high winged,radial engined utility machine.See what you think…

There’s an excellent article on the Meteor in this month’s Aeroplane if you can get hold of a copy,including some stuff about the MB test beds.Apparently they’re hoping to keep them going for another 15-20 years! 🙂

Absolutely superb pics Snapper,thanks for all of ’em!I agree with Moggy that all of ’em would have a story of thier own to tell.You wonder how long some of those young blokes had to live when those piccies were taken.If only we had names for the faces…
I noticed that this piccy was the wrong way around,so I’ve put it through MS Paint and flipped it the right way around.Is this the first time this picture has ever been seen the right way around I wonder…?

I have to agree with Galdri that the writers of this web page actually put forward a balanced case,rather than being for thier own gain.However,I’d also agree that lawsuits surrounding events of 60+ years ago are a little pointless and can be disrespectful in some cases.
Correct me if I’m wrong,but from what I read,it seems as though the lawsuit is with Stephen Ambrose’s estate (Mr Ambrose passed away late last year.)In his book Band of Brothers,Ambrose makes blanket statements which basically claim that the TCG guys did a very bad job due to them being cowardly,badly trained and unproffessional etc,but the facts contradict this judgement.The problem is that Ambrose’s work is now taken almost as gospel due to his work being so highly acclaimed,so the TCG veterans can’t afford simply to shrug thier shoulders and accept the mistake of a historian because what Ambrose says has been widely read and is taken by the majority as absolute truth.The TCG guys run the risk of having thier reputation tarnished for all time if they don’t get it put right.
On this basis I would say that this law suit is one of the few of this type to trully be worth the effort,the TCG guys have my support.

The long,spindley and rather precarious looking undercart legs on the poor old Stirling were a result of the wingspan reduction which was insisted on by the Air Ministry,the original span not fitting in existing hangars.This loss of span resulted in loss of wing area and a corresponding loss of lift,and this meant that the aircraft would’ve taken a hell of a run before getting airborne.The solution was to lengthen the legs which increased the angle of attack available on take off before the tail hit the ground.
Aswell as the better known problems with undercart collapses,this change of undercart design also put extra stress on the electrical systems.The Stirling had an awful lot of gizmos which were electrically operated,the idea being to save the wieght and bulk of hydraulic systems.Even the flaps and landing gear where electrically operated.The problem was that the system hadn’t been designed to operate these bulkier legs,but at the same time it would’ve taken a major redesign to convert the system from electric to hydraulic,hydraulic lines needing larger holes drilled through structural parts etc etc.This dictated that Shorts would have to stay with the electrical system if it was to get the bomber into service within a useful time frame.In practice,this meant that it could take as much as two minutes to cycle the landing gear,and on numerous occasions the motors and/or thier associated curcuitry would burn out.This is the reason why so many Stirling’s had to belly land at some time or other,some belly-flopping more than once in thier career.
So complex were the electrics that Stirling squadrons actually had an extra electrical specialist assigned to each ground crew,and a new rank was even given to these specialists (unfortunately I can’t remember the name of the rank!).
All in all,the majority of the Stirling’s problems were caused by that initial reduction in wingspan,and it makes you wonder what the aircraft might’ve gone on to achieve had the Government decided to splash out on bigger hangars.As it was,the Stirling crews gave sterling service,and the aircraft’s deficiances should only serve to increase our respect for those who flew and maintaned them.