Lovely colour scheme.

Which squadron does this represent?

I am familiar with 80 Squadron based Hornets, and their spinners were painted to distinguish between Blue or Red flight, and white was reserved for the CO.

Is this the same for this aircraft?

I remember the B29 arriving. Was its aquisition always intended to form the basis of an American museum or tribute? Or did anyone ever think of painting it as an RAF Washington?

The fundamental problem with the Tempest – either version is the engine.

As the other thread on Sabre survivors shows, there arent many, and very few that would be good enough to restore to flight status.

With the Centaurus, the Tempest uses a very early version of the engine, which again is a difficult problem to overcome. Not insurmountable – just expensive.

At the end of the day, the Fury/Sea Fury series represent a better and cheaper aeroplane, which I think is why these Tempest survivors have been sidelined.

I’d give it a home, but at what price?

Bruce

In the grand scheme of things, yes the Sea Fury is a better type, but the Tempest can still be looked at as a late WW2 “type” even though this particular “mark” didn’t enter service until post war. The Tempest II was one of the main types in the immediate post war TAF based in Germany. It would be great to see one in the air again.

MW376

This surely represents a good project for someone to consider doing a flying re-build on?

I don’t know the cost, but surely an unfinished project like this represents the best oportunity to pick one up at a better price?

Let’s hope someone with determination and passion for British aviation can buy this and return it to the air. When would have the last Tempest flown? Late 50’s, early 60’s?

Hello Peter

What a fascinating project you are doing! Thanks for sharing progress with us all on this forum. It is great to see an extinct type being recreated again.

Best of luck.

Ye gads – what hapenend to the other two? Not being used for raising marrows one would hope!

Well, I know one is spoken for, but I believe the last one is still available. I could put anyone interested in touch with the owner.

4 Hornet canopies found standing behind a greenhouse last summer! 🙂

One-way “exchange” of ideas

Verbal claims are countered by verbal denials…….what we need is hard evidence i.e. A Miles headed Tech Note in the Bell Archive or even a vague reference to Miles design data in a NACA report.

Remember that technology transferred from one company to another doesn’t even have to be in the form of files or hard evidence. It is just as likely that an idea was communicated verbally:

“Ok, so you predict pitch instability approaching Mach 1, due to inafective elevator performance? If you try an all-moving tail plane, this may over come the problem”

There you go, one idea communicated from A to B, without any files. 🙂