BomberboyF4
“Funny that, as we were told there wasn’t a press call…”
Gary, don’t believe everything you hear or don’t as in this case!
Bomberboy
BomberboyCracking Toast Grommitt!
Don’t you just love it when a Warbird comes together?
Turbo NZ
“Looks like they set it up rich judging by the faint trail of black behind it.”
Good I’m glad I wasn’t the only one that noticed.
Merry x-mas everybody.
Bomberboy
BomberboyI’ll 27th that one everybody,
MERRY CHRISTMAS & A HAPPY NEW YEAR.
Lets hope 2005 is a bumper year!
Bomberboy
BomberboyDamien B
“It’s TV for those with the attention span of a goldfish, and incredibly irritating”.
I totally agree, but unfortunately Damien, There are a lot of flippin Goldfish out there!
Bomberboy
BomberboySteve Young,
I agree with you entirely and welcome your comments.
It also appears it’s not only the TV people that get the ‘facts’ wrong, facts which others pickup and then without realising, believe that it is now an ‘actual fact’.
I say this because somehow even in this Forum, this programme has now changed from being a ‘reality’ TV show with factual accounts/recollections and ‘contestants’, to a being ‘Factual Documentary’……This it most certainly isn’t and was never intended to be!
With all the experts/enthusiasts in this forum, in this particular subject, it shows how easily things get misconscrewed and it goes back to other threads where ‘what’s in a word’ can make all the difference, but can also be judged as being picky.
Even some of the items that are being discussed ie Bags of Flour, show that some know less than what they think they know and now berrate and disagree about, whilst others know it as a matter of fact.
So now as a matter of fact, having been shown on the programme and discussed through this forum, they have now learnt something, even if they do feel a little silly in making an issue out of it.
If everbody on this forum got together to make a programme, I guarantee you, it would go one of two ways.
1/ You would all have your own opinions that you would wish to see portrayed and if every opinion was covered in order to keep everybody happy, you would end up with a dinosoar of a programme which I’ve no doubt would be totally uninteresting to the vast majority of viewers.
Also you would not be happy with each others opinions and would end up exactly where you are now disagreeing with each other on what is & isn’t actual fact.
You would even disagree on what the programme format should be.
You cannot cover every accurate detail on a programme and keep it interesting.
2/ And this is morelikely to be the case.
you would disagree in certain areas and unless some of you compromised in these areas, the end result would be that you would never end up making the programme.
Don’t forget, the way discussion is here, even one compromise would not be acceptable.
If however you did all come to your senses and compromise with regards to certain areas in order that you could at least make a watchable programme, guess what you’d end up with………..that’s right……..Bomber Crew or the likes of.
Again, this kind of programme should be enjoyed for what it is, even with it’s mistakes.
It has highlighted some very important areas and raised the profile of vintage (particularly Warbirds) aviation, as well as injected a little revenue into a few bank accounts.
If it gauls individuals soooooo much, then they should switch channels and watch Eastenders or the like, or turn off altogether.
Then they would not be able to comment on the programme in the first place.
Bomberboy
BomberboyJohn C,
That was quite well put.
I really don’t know why people have to analyse everything in so much detail?
What else is there on the TV these days that either isn’t either a pile of ‘soap’ c**p or that we havent seen before?
It’s not like the ‘whingers’ have even invested their own time or more importantly, money, into making the absolutely ‘perfect, accurate’ programme.
I doubt that there could be such a programme made, because in real life you’ll always find someone else has done the opposite to what you believe is the ‘only’ way something could happen, so now your programme would now in fact be innacurate.
Where would one stop?
Stewart1a,
I agree with what you are trying to say about PA474 not being mentioned, it was a little discreditting to the BBMF but I can only think that as John C suggests, they told the film company to ‘take a hike’ otherwise why did they have to use NX611 for the Lanc crawl-over.
Just think, in recent times, that’s twice NX611 has been used for TV instead of PA474, the first I believe had the BBMF crew piloting 611 for it and as there was no flying, there were no ‘hours’ involved for that programme, so I don’t think hours is the only reason for non-involvement. One has to remember 474 is still in Military service in the Air Force and there are rules and regs that must be followed.
It does seem a trifle spiteful to only say the Canadian Lanc is one of only two flying examples in the world and that Sally B is the only heavy currently operating in Britain, but who knows the reasons why, maybe the BBMF were less than helpful?
Sally B was used because in order to have a four engined ‘heavy’ it was the next best thing if not the only alternative to having the Lanc.
After all same size, same weight fully loaded, same number of engines, just a much smaller bomb load particularly over longer distances.
The one thing the 17 has that is at least equal to the Lanc if not possibly even greater and that is it’s charisma, and the fact that even though it’s a yank, it is a reasonably well known houshold name, you know the spit/hurri scenario.
You only have to ask yourself with half as many built again, c18k, a heavier bomb load, much greater endurance and slight speed advantage, why is the B-24 Liberator population so poor?
Another thing, why did you not see any kind of representation from the Sally B crew, how do you think that feels, particularly as it’s ‘their’ aeroplane, instead it’s the super s****y cheif ‘instructor’ and bomber expert…..not…….B O’B.
With these kinds of programmes, one has to watch and appreciate them for what they are………..or look the other way!
Bomberboy
BomberboyGaldri,
“Hummm, not quite sure where you are comming from here.” – Obviously, I thought I spelled it out very simply!
Paragraphs 1 & 2; – Totally irrelevant here, any reference for parrafin props was never made!
Paragraph 3; – All piston engines are direct drive engines, you can not turn the engine without turning the prop…….. very good we ppear to be getting somewhere!
With regards to the rest of the paragraph I’ll give you an old saying – Proof in the pudding is in the eating, and I’ve seen a few puddings in my time. (no I’m not a F*t biffa)
The following scenario could happen if you start by unfeathering the prop first….The engine does not start and now your left with a windmilling prop that you will have to feather again…..darn it.
Even when you’re flying along with a feathered prop it still can turn a bit, provided of course nothing has seized, so to start an engine with the prop feathered is no big deal.
I’ve seen many an engine run with the prop in full feather and have not seen the engine quit through detonation.
“So how do we start piston engines from feather? On a big thing like a Merlin, I think (without knowing for sure)”
Now call me stupid, but didn’t you just tell us exactly how we should all start or big piston engines. If there’s one thing that niggles me and that’s………………………….
Bomberboy
BomberboySycamore,
You can start an engine and keep it in the feathered position until you are up and running, where you can then unfeather the prop and put it on load immediately.
If it decides not to unfeather then at least it’s in the right position.
Your ‘inference (there’s that word again) suggests that in restarting a feathered engine will immediately cause major drag problems, particularly where asymetrics are concerned.
But as I detailed above, engines can be re-started with no ‘significant’ problems and regardless of which position on a multi engined aircraft.
Bomberboy
BomberboyEN380 wrote;
“Great programme, though I’m not that keen on Brendan O’Flannel or what ever his name is”.
Just think how we thought when we were told Mr slicked back hair, shades and ‘fake’ A2 was going to present the Sally B to the trainees as ‘the bomber expert’.
Ask yourself this, as the ‘chief instructor’ what has he actually instructed?
There are far better people that wouldhave been better suited for his ‘role’.
He should have stuck to landing Pipercubs on Lorrytops!
Bomberboy
BomberboyDave Homewood,
You are spot on.
Ironically, the very point that Dave makes is exactly how my ‘active’ interest started.
Watching the take off sequence of a new series featuring a then relatively little known aeroplane…..A Wartime B-17 Flying Fortress Bomber called Sally B in We’ll Meet Again.
At this time I did not even realise these legends…call them whatever you like, existed let alone were actually gracing the skies.
My limit at that time really only related to a quiet building that just happened to be full of aeroplanes, Hendon.
As excellent a museum it is with a collection second to none, it is not ‘alive’ with living aeroplanes.
Once I had been shown the light, Hendon just didn’t seem the same anymore.
Bomberboy
BomberboyLancman,
I’m not pedantic.
Sometimes even the same words but in a different order will mean totally different things.
I’m sure in your lifetime if you havent come across this already, you will do and when you do and it works for you, wont be using the words pedantic.
Flanker Man,
Tne thing I did pick up – and someone else has alluded to – did I hear right when the narrator said something like “Sally B is the only FULLY WORKING WWII heavy bomber” ?? Did he then add “in the world” or Europe – or UK ??
I assume by that he means that PA474 is not ‘fully working’ – turrets, guns, other bits etc and Sally B is fully working ??
See previous comment to Lancman.
The programme, whether you think it’s dead accurate or not, or irritates you in any way, does one thing for all of us,
As Flanker man intimates it get’s our hobby in the public domain, generates funds and interests so that all of us can pursue our ‘live’ hobby and for a change puts something else new on the box instead of the nightly S***e that we are constantly lambasted with.
If you think otherwise, your in the wrong hobby!
Bomberboy
BomberboyDH
No different to Mosquitos, RS709 and RS712 both going to the USA from the UK.
At least it would be flying unlike both of the above!
I quite agree.
What has been allowed to happen to these two is nothing short of apalling.
What about the Sunderland? I don’t think this has exactly been gracing the air much since it departed to the US.
As for colour schemes, does it matter?
If people are so worried about aircraft colour schemes or even if it’s got quite the right powerplant in, who gives a stuff, It’s in the air isn’t it?
If it’s the nearest or only way of seeing a certain type in the air, then it gets my support.
If it does bother some well the easy answer is to go and buy one themselves and find that non existent power plant or paint it in any scheme they like.
But be prepared to face other ‘perfectionist’ critics like themselves when they havent used quite the right shade of Pink.
Of course it’s always easy to be critical……….when it’s not your money!
Bomberboy
BomberboyB-17 man,
Some of those last piccys are in my albumn as well!
If I could get piccys on, I have a load as well.
Alas, I cannot do this through the works PC.
Just think, if we hadn’t been so busy firing 50cal Brownings all the time, dodging engine cowlings and the like, B17 man and myself would have had even more piccys to post.
Bomberboy
Bomberboyref: I am sure you have the capability to restore these ‘old turrets’, why not fix them up and fit them it?
Bureaucracy i’m afraid old chap.
Bomberboy
BomberboyAccording to the Narrator If I heard correctly, apart from Sally, there are no other 4 engined heavies flying in the UK!
But I suppose as the narrator was the ‘newbie’ radio man in newly arrived Mother & Country in Memphis Belle, he could be forgiven for a little bias.
As for turrets, there’s plenty of those around, why there’s even some ‘old’ turrets knocking around in a corner of one of the hangers at Duxford.
Need a bit of work done on them mind you.
Bomberboy
Sign In
