dark light

WB556

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 321 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: An Alternative Falkland Scenario #2262414
    WB556
    Participant

    Brazil has the World Cup and then the Olympics either side of the 2015 date, they would not get involved in a war when the world is watching. The US would relish the chance to have a little Venezuelan target practise and I think you will find the US navy would know exactly where any Venezuelan submarines were operating.

    in reply to: Scenario: Re-arming Argentina #2264603
    WB556
    Participant

    One other thing to note is that we now have sea launched tomahawks and air launch storm shadow cruise missiles. Surgical strikes on mainland targets taking out C&C and runways would have a devastating effect.

    in reply to: Canberra PR.9 belly pod, any ideas? #978667
    WB556
    Participant

    The only problem with this being a system III pod is that it had no camera windows?

    More from the photographer –

    I think the reason why they parked the PR9 on that remote area was because the HAECO hangers would block the view from outside Kai Tak. Unless you were on the RAF Kai Tak side, you would not be able to see the PR9 that easy. The RAF Kai Tak ramp area was rather open, and without tall building to hide anything from ‘viewers’ on higher floors of those tall buildings around outside the base.
    I still think that belly pod was not a System III. I’ve done some research on it and System III was an internal fit unit with three camera windows (1 vertical 2 oblique). There was no such windows visible around that belly pod, so I can only conclude it housed some kind of antenna for electronic equipments. Using the same gun pod shape would not have any aerodynamic problem, and can easily get cleared for flight.
    When I took the photos, the RAF Regiment guard (unarmed) was next to me watching, and gave me five minutes to take the photos. I can only shot three photos because not only short of time, but also running out of film, as K64 slide was very expensive at that time !

    in reply to: Canberra PR.9 belly pod, any ideas? #981096
    WB556
    Participant

    I don’t think that’s the same mod, the bump on the original picture seems to protrude further from the belly of the aircraft and appears smoother.

    More info-

    Here is the other side view of XH134 at RAF Kai Tak. As you can see there was no squadron marking on it at all, and the number 134 was on the nose gear door. The aircraft was parked at a remote ramp in between RAF Kai Tak main ramp and HAECO, actually closer to HAECO.

    in reply to: Canberra PR.9 belly pod, any ideas? #981304
    WB556
    Participant

    More from the photographer.

    FYI the Canberra PR9 missions staged through RAF Kai Tak Hong Kong never overflew China. It skirt along the international air space boarding China, westward as far as Hainan Island. So far I can tell you is that the ‘information’ gained was shared with USA, and these were combined photographic as well as electronic missions.
    I recall the same XH134 flew in and out of HKG three times within a 10 days period in 1982. I was told by my friends in HKG that hemp coloured PR9 also took similar missions in early 90s (92, 93 ??).
    I was wondering what is that belly pod was for all these years, but can’t ask !! However someone told me that System III was internally mounted and not in a pod, as it was a camera system with windows. So we need more ‘light’ to shine on this mystery pod if it is really a System III, a fuel tank ? or what ?
    BTW I can’t recall any squadron marking on this PR9, and it is not surprising that it didn’t carry any on such kind of mission.

    in reply to: Canberra PR.9 belly pod, any ideas? #982253
    WB556
    Participant

    More info from the photographer.

    I took the photo in October 82, but don’t have the exact date now. This photo was not allowed to be released until last year as I was under the Security Act restriction.
    The Canberra mission to China, usually would have the aircraft come in very early morning or mid-day from a Country SW of Hong Kong (Singapore implied). It would then be refuelled and off for a 3-4 hour mission, return for fuel, crew debriefed, and then took off back to that Country. The aircraft as far as I can recall, never overnight in Hong Kong.

    Does anyone know what was so critical in the region at the time? I wonder if the lack of markings could be due to the possibility that this PR.9 may have operated in temporary Chilean markings over the Falklands in the same year? Maybe I have an over active imagination!

    in reply to: Happy New Year #986452
    WB556
    Participant

    Adding my hopes for a healthy and happy 2013 to all forumites!

    Here’s to a year of peace, harmony and more spitfires than you can shake a stick at! 😉

    in reply to: The 'JUST A NICE PIC…' thread #2268168
    WB556
    Participant

    Toasted hornet anyone

    Amazing shot

    in reply to: The 'JUST A NICE PIC…' thread #2268179
    WB556
    Participant

    Makes a nice wallpaper

    Stealth package

    in reply to: 2013 fresh start. #989724
    WB556
    Participant

    I like the forum as it is. As many others have said its the variety of threads and posts that keeps it interesting. It’s not solely an archive or sterile environment for academic or technical discussion but a forum for people with a shared interest to enjoy themselves. Most threads are informative, some inspiring others just a plain laugh. I must confess to getting a bit of a headache while reading a few threads but that’s the joy of having ones own mind, when you’ve had enough move on.

    We already live in an age of political correctness that means that free speech is effectively a thing of the past. Little good seems to come from increased levels of censorship, if it isn’t broken don’t fix it.

    Oh and for reference the autocorrect only comes into play if your spelling is incorrect in the first place or your fingers are so big that they just mash the keyboard 🙂

    (Posted with an iPhone)

    in reply to: P-51 Fun #1005423
    WB556
    Participant

    Couldn’t abandon the bike there! He would have to take her on the wing then send her on her way 🙂

    in reply to: Why has this Beaufighter not been recovered? #1008192
    WB556
    Participant

    I’m assuming everyone here knows about this too!

    http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafnews/latestnews/mysterywreckstillhasexpertsbaffled.cfm

    in reply to: Why has this Beaufighter not been recovered? #1008194
    WB556
    Participant

    If anyone has a lead on a wet Firebrand let me know and I’ll go and get it.

    in reply to: Why has this Beaufighter not been recovered? #1008312
    WB556
    Participant

    Considering its only in Greece and is a RAF machine with a known history in pretty good nick (in relative terms!) it seems a shame.

    in reply to: Why has this Beaufighter not been recovered? #1008335
    WB556
    Participant

    Also any ideas on this engine?

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 321 total)