An225 sighted over Duffield, Derbyshire about 25 minutes ago. Never seen her before, absolutely awesome! She was up at a good few thousand feet and still looked absolutely massive- she’s bl**dy huge!! 🙂
Thinking about what Radpoe has said above got me thinking about the different velocities of bullets fired from forward and rearward facing guns. Would a rearward firing .303 have more ‘punch’ than a forward facing one??
Just thinking out loud…
Just seen her over Duffield, Derbyshire about 5 minutes ago. Caught sight of her completely by chance, wonderful sight. 🙂
😡 😡 😡
Oh the merry-go-round continues! The victor is dumped back out again! Why cant they start on her restoration it is a shame what has happened to her externally. Now we have a shackleton wiht missing wingtips as well on outdoor display!:( 😡
Easy tiger 😀 It’s just for a few days, according to the Duxford Update site the restoration area of the Airspace hangar is being used for some kind of (corporate?) event this week.
http://www.duxford-update.info/
Click on the News & Links bar on the top left.
Mike, your confusion is understandable. The G is basically an early D model (later D’s had the ‘bubbletop’), it’s just that it was built by Curtiss, hence the different letter. Likewise, the P51B and P51C are essentially the same, except that one was built at the plant in California and the latter were built at a plant in Texas.
So, a P47G is a Curtiss-built Razorback P47D.
As far as I’m aware, the only mainstream two-seat Hunter kit was a 1:72 job from Matchbox about 25 years ago. I think there are plans to re-release this kit under the Revell label.
The only other two-seater was a Vacform in 1:32 scale, made by Echelon. I don’t know how widely available this kit is or ever was, but the two pictures I’ve found via-google suggest it makes a half decent model.
http://www.ipms.nl/mip/expo-mv.html
The Hunters are about half way down the page.
Hope this helps.
Another problem with early Swifts was the small vertical tail, which caused directional stability problems at altitude and at lower speeds (early F100 Super Sabres had a similar problem). This was solved with a larger tail from the F.Mk.4 onwards.
With regard to the RAFM’s Swift at Tangmere, I saw her with all sorts of panels removed when I was last there a couple of years ago. Apparently a small team from RAFM were giving her a thorough check-over. From what I could see, it does seem that she’s been extensively gutted ( I was told the cockpit is fairly complete though). Despite this, she seems to be in pristine structural nick inside and out.
Paul,
I think the fuselage you are referring to was removed for preservation sometime in the 1970’s, but somehow ended up being scrapped. 🙁 I think there are others on the forum who can give more detail.
I did a bit of digging into all things Siskin a couple of years ago, with just the same question in mind, ie, what original drawings and parts survive and what might be reconstructed out of them.
Distracted by other things, I haven’t got as far with my inquiries as I would have liked, but having scratched the surface it seems there are very few if any original drawings surviving. On the plus side, there do seem to be quite a few bits and pieces still about (including rumours of a fuselage frame in Canada, and perhaps a centre section in Estonia), in addition to the RAFM/MAM wings.
If someone felt like ‘picking up the torch’ from me and chasing things up, I’m pretty sure a goodly number of Siskin bits could be rounded up. Any takers?
Another novel feature of the Trident’s undercarriage design was the sideways-retracting nosewheel, which was mounted well off-centre. This was to allow space for the Smiths autoland system and other avionics.
Can’t find any pictures, but I’ve found this side elavation of the port side on wings-pallette. Apparently the scheme was a camouflage experiment in 1955.
http://wp.scn.ru/en/ww3/f/97/3/3/29
Hope this helps
This ‘thing’ has been mentioned on this forum before. Apparently it’s a Nanchang CJ6 modified to look like an F84, perhaps for a film. Can’t find the old thread just at the moment…
…Found it!
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=48155&highlight=Nanchang
Aeroplane published a survivors listing at the end of the Hurricane Database section in the October issue. They list 12 as airworthy, with another 8 under restoration to fly. (They actually list 13 as airworthy, but this was before the tragic crash at Shoreham last month. :() The listing comes to a total of 47 survivors, including the substantial wreck on display at RAFM Hendon.
Lovely to see another Spit airborne, congratulations to all involved. Here’s hoping we’ll get a chance to see her fly before she get’s shipped, if indeed that’s the plan.
As Papa Lima has said, the accident and attrition rates associated with carrier ops were/are always higher than land-based. I’ve recently re-read ‘Carrier Pilot’, the autobiography of Fleet Air Arm fighter pilot Norman Hanson. He flew Corsairs with 1833Sqn aboard HMS Illustrious in the Pacific during 1944, and it seems that ‘prangs’ of one sort or another were a daily occurance. It wasn’t helped by the fact that Illustrious also had a Fairey Barracuda squadron, another type that was notoriously tricky to land without bending it. Hanson comments on how every Corsair landing looked dicey, but every Barra landing looked a certain crash!
Ofcourse this was in the days before angled decks, where you were guaranteed to end up in the barriers (or something even more substantial) if you missed the arrestor wires. There was virtually no such thing as a ‘bolter’ in those days, unless you were lucky enough to be landing on a completely empty deck.
Peter,
That’s a Wildcat rather than a Hellcat 😉
Nice build Bex. 🙂