dark light

Chox

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 935 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Finningley sixties video #1108328
    Chox
    Participant

    The film is Finningley there’s absolutely no doubt about that, the only question is which year but there’s definitely documentation somewhere (can’t remember where) which mentions which year it was when four Victors did the demonstration scramble. The location was obviously just a mistake on the part of whoever posted-up the video on Youtube.

    Lindholme’s shows were never on the same scale as Finningley’s and they didn’t stage any events there in the 1960s as far as I’m aware. The only event they had was for cadets and that was a low-key affair held somewhere around 1978 if remember correctly (long time ago – was a school kid at the time).

    Victors did visit Lindholme occasionally though but only for training, visits and for modifications. There was no V-Bomber ORP there and the base wasn’t designated as a V-Bomber dispersal in any case. The main link with the V-Force was BCBS/SCBS with their fleet of Varsities and Hastings which operated from Lindholme for many years. The Hastings T5 fleet was painted silver with dayglow patches originally and then switched to the later transport command colours (with dayglow) and finally the high-visibility red markings by which time they had moved to Scampton in the early 1970s. After that the airfield was only used an an RLG for Finningley and as a “bolt hole” during the air show week.

    It’s a great film though. Finningley’s shows were remarkably small in the 1960s when compared to the ambitious events they held in the 1980s onwards, but the aircraft on show were of course all from the “golden days”. Back then the flying display usually didn’t begin until at least 2pm and ended at five, but what a line-up!

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1108994
    Chox
    Participant

    Somehow I don’t think BBMF counts as “active service” 🙂

    in reply to: Meteor dimensions #1109128
    Chox
    Participant

    That is how they should be.

    Well yes, I see what you mean, but not quite like this? :-

    http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y146/Shefftim/brakes.jpg

    in reply to: Meteor dimensions #1109407
    Chox
    Participant

    Frustrating business… Dragon’s kit features recesses for the air brakes and etched brass brakes which look great, but although the underside brakes feature the nine “cut-outs” but they’re divided unevenly into a block of two then four then three… all very odd…

    in reply to: Finningley sixties video #1109419
    Chox
    Participant

    It was just a scramble demonstration for the show. It was usually four Vulcans of course (sometimes only two) but on at least one occasion it was performed by four Victors – as illustrated on the video. I did see a reference to the actual year somewhere once but I’m not sure where. Might have been in the Scramble (if you’ll pardon the pun) archives.

    in reply to: Finningley sixties video #1109720
    Chox
    Participant

    er… see the first post 😀

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1109723
    Chox
    Participant

    will this nonsense always rear its head

    The idea of taking XH558 to the US isn’t nonsense though. David Walton very nearly did this many years ago.

    in reply to: Meteor dimensions #1109870
    Chox
    Participant

    Now John, surely you can appreciate a challenge?!

    Joe, I’d be inclined to sit-back and wait for later versions to be released but looking at the sprues, I don’t think it’s going to happen. It looks pretty-much like it’s a Mk.3 and that’s it, sadly. (PS Joe, re your comments on the “What If” site. My surname is “McLelland” and has been for years).

    Oh well, if I lose my nerve I might go for the less-difficult option and try making an F.4!

    in reply to: Meteor dimensions #1110135
    Chox
    Participant

    Might well do – I’ll keep you posted on that one and thanks!

    I’ve been looking through references and I think the extension seems to be just the forward fuselage. Problem is, the available kits have all tried their best to capture the right proportions of the various versions but none of them seems to have got them quite right, and the references don’t seem too clear either.

    If I was to take an educated guess, I would assume that the F4 is basically the F3 with a fuselage extension ahead of the wings, new engine fairings and “clipped” wings with ailerons that are shorter in span but the same chord-wise. The T7 is presumably the same F4 airframe but with a longer cockpit cut-out.

    That might well be an over-simplification though?!:D

    in reply to: Finningley sixties video #1110150
    Chox
    Participant

    Sea Vixen?

    in reply to: Finningley sixties video #1110221
    Chox
    Participant

    Guess you have a choice of two! I’m sure someone will know on here…

    in reply to: 56 Sqn "Checkerboard" tail Lightnings? #1110232
    Chox
    Participant

    I was just about to ask if anyone had any photos – hooray! Your image of the line-abreast formation is much the same resolution as mine… that seems to be as good as it gets. Wish I knew where the originals went as I so like these markings. Anybody know what happened to Keith Wilson’s pictures? He took a beautiful shot of one of these machines which I used on the cover of my Lightning book last year. But nobody knows where the originals have gone. Cassell had a lot of them at one stage but even they don’t seem to have a clue where they went now. It’s sad that so many great images have a habit of disappearing.

    in reply to: TSR2 Book addition #1113059
    Chox
    Participant

    It’s a frustrating business as you guys must know. In this case I think the assumption must have been that the accompanying table (which was included in the book) was sufficient (which it is) but the text still refers to the missing drawing which is a tad confusing. No big deal but thanks to the powers of the glorious internet I can partially resolve this mystery for some readers, in this case!

    in reply to: RAF Hercules Camouflage? #1113819
    Chox
    Participant

    Yep, the clue is in the location. It’s the standard dark grey and dark green paint scheme but the forward section has been resprayed so it contrasts with the heavily-faded grey on the rest of the aircraft. I guess it had probably been “patched up” whilst at Teversham.

    in reply to: Late Cold-War photo resource #1116164
    Chox
    Participant

    …which is quite funny as I think I’d pay ’em good money to throw some of ’em in the bin!

    I know what you mean though – amongst the garbage there are some real gems even though they are ruined by watermarks.

Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 935 total)