dark light

Eric Mc

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 543 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Stupid question time!! #1396948
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    Would a Griffon leave a faint smoke trail at full blast? The Schneider Trophy R engines certainly did.

    in reply to: Stupid question time!! #1397121
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    Unfortunately, most of us don’t get to hear Griffons at full throttle these days. I presume your Spit is blasting along after a V1 with the throttle through the gate? I ‘d say it must sound like a throaty howl or a throaty snarl. The nearest to a full power Griffon I’ve heard is a Shackleton taking off which was pretty awesome although with the Shackleton you got the throb of the contra-probs phasing in and out of sync superimposed over the exhaust note.

    in reply to: Berkshire Aviation Museum #1397504
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    I didn’t take any more pictures. I realised afterwards that I should have taken one of the Martinet – I just got into too many conversations with the “staff”. As I said, they’re a friendly bunch.

    in reply to: Old plastic kits #1399647
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    They fit into the general mood of the late 60s early 70s – a curious mix of California Hot Rods, hippy culture, WW1 and WW2 nostalgia and kit bashing.

    What a combination.

    in reply to: Warbirds Alive Book #1400370
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    By coincidence I have this on loan from my local library. Whilst it majors on pictures and details of some quality recent restorations, it also has some very interesting pictures of aircraft such as P-40s and Bearcats when they were being used as racers, fire spotters and general fast transpoorts back in the 1950s.

    in reply to: Doug Arnold #1403970
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    I agree. It makes me want to cry every time I pass by.

    in reply to: Fairey Rotodyne #1405483
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    It wasn’t just the British “new concept designs” that failed commercially, it was also many of the much more conventional aircraft too. Most British manufacturers were very much geared towards satisfying technical and performance specifications set by the government – whether for military aircraft or civillian airliners. Whilst military aircraft are invariably “government” driven, airliners are a different kettle of fish. Too often, British airliners were tailored so close to the requirements of the two nationalised airlines (BOAC and BEA) that they proved impossible to sell to anyone else. Indeed, often the national airlines discovered that the planes they had thought they wanted turned out to be inappropriate for their needs so they either cut the orders or asked for a major redesign – ot bought American.

    The manufacturers themselves seemed unable (with the odd exception) to think of general market requirements and were just too wedded to the state airlines. The exceptions were aircraft like the BAC 1-11 and later the BAe 146. Even the Viscount (which of course, WAS a success) was based on an Air Ministry specification.

    in reply to: Fairey Rotodyne #1406699
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    I have to agree with a lot of what Mr Boyle says. In the late 1950s, the British aircraft indistry was well on the road to self destruction anyway. Sandys did play his part (as did Dennis Healey later on) but these individuals became handy scapegoats for what was probably inevitable anyway.

    in reply to: The Right Stuff and Chuck Yeager #1407609
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    Apart from some black and white footage at the beginning of the film, as far as I know ALL the colour footage was shot specially for the movie. The ground shots of the X-1 feature a full size mock up and the flying shots were actually done with models on wires (no CGI of any note back in 1983).

    The F-104 is indeed one of the US based Luftwaffe F-104Gs. I think Yeager had his accident in the NF-104.

    I’m pretty sure the B-29 is the CAF’s “Fifi”. The underside would have been painted black to simulate the colours of the B-29 used in the real X-1 drops back in 1947.

    in reply to: Look! Tha's a……… #1410211
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    I remember that 🙂

    I used to whinge about the standards of commentary on these latter BBC airshow programmes – especially from the various “bimbos” they used to bring in to add a touch of glamour, obviously with zippo knowledge of aircraft.

    Now I wish they’d just show the odd airshow, bimbo or not.

    Once Raymond Baxter handed in his retirement application, airshow coverage on the Beeb began a slippy slope to oblivion.

    in reply to: Two photos of TSR.2 test flight. #1410416
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    Has anyone else noticed the similarity between the tailfin of the TSR2 and the Eurofighter Typhoon?

    Eric Mc
    Participant

    Looks like they were as proud of the new hangar as they were of the plane.

    in reply to: Its about time that…….. #1412727
    Eric Mc
    Participant

    Most languages tend to put the adjective after the noun. “Red dog” in Irish is “Madra Rua” – “Madra” being “dog” and “rua” being “red”.

    In fact, “Madra Rua” is really the Irish for “fox”.

    Eric Mc
    Participant

    The first few Hermes built DID have tailwheels and so did all versions of the military derivative, the Hastings.
    The Hermes was an ill conceived and poorly executed design. They were pretty much loathed by BOAC who much preferred the Argonaut even though it was based on an American design ten years older. The Hermes is a good example of how the British airliner industry was going wrong (as is the Avro Tudor).

    Eric Mc
    Participant

    Most Hermes’ had nosewheel gear.

    The Vanguard first flew in 1959 by which time the Brabazons (the prototype and second example – which never flew) had both been scrapped. I’d say this picture is from a Farnborough Air Show from around the 1950-52 period.

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 543 total)