Page 55 – Key Publishing

Chox

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 811 through 825 (of 935 total)

← 1 2 3 … 54 55 56 … 61 62 63 →

Author

Posts
January 8, 2009 at 7:52 pm in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1169079

Chox
Participant

There’s a distinct smell of deja vu in the air here…

A whole page of comment already, all inspired by a press release which says absolutely nothing we haven’t heard before…

January 8, 2009 at 1:15 pm in reply to: Miles M.52 and the X-1 – again! #1169548

Chox
Participant

I take it nobody else has anything to add to the original question posed on this thread?

January 8, 2009 at 4:48 am in reply to: Farnborough Met Flight #1169739

Chox
Participant

It is indeed and the hooligans at Duxford destroyed it. So much for being a museum – guess you can only count on surviving if you happen to be a Spitfire! Thanks for the photos – they’re great. Love the MRF Fleet! The Canberra sadly ender her days on the dump at Coltishall I believe.

January 8, 2009 at 4:37 am in reply to: Hawker Sea Hawk WV910 (ETPS machine) – photos? #1169740

Chox
Participant

Rocketeer, I’m not accusing anyone of anything – if you think my hunch is wrong then fine, as I said, I’d love to see a photo of the aircraft in the grey/red scheme because I’ve never seen a photo of a Sea Hawk in such colours before – nor has anyone else it seems.

All I was saying is that if the aircraft stopped flying around 1960, then it would surely have been in a fairly standard FAA paint scheme at that time. The grey/red paint scheme didn’t appear on machines until later? Pictures of A&AEE/ETPS aircraft around 1960 show the airframes in standard paint schemes (ie camouflage or silver with T-bands, etc). Consequently, I could only assume that if the Sea Hawk did receive grey/red paint, it would have been after she stopped flying? Likewise, as has been said previously, the red overspray visible on the photo suggests that the red was applied after the nose was removed, so unless she was repainted…

January 7, 2009 at 4:36 pm in reply to: Hawker Sea Hawk WV910 (ETPS machine) – photos? #1170172

Chox
Participant

My hunch is that the aircraft didn’t carry a grey/red paint scheme during her flying career. The dates mentioned are pretty early and at that stage I would think it more likely that standard FAA colours were worn. I guess it’s possible that the grey/red scheme was applied at a later stage when the aircraft became a ground instructional airframe though, but in the absence of a photo I suppose we have to conclude that only the nose section was painted… but let’s see if any evidence emerges!

January 7, 2009 at 12:12 am in reply to: Miles M.52 and the X-1 – again! #1170494

Chox
Participant

This is what I was getting-at. It’s like so many “facts” which you read in books which are rarely questioned and then when somebody does stop to ask, it transpires that one author has simply taken the “fact” from another author and so on. I get the feeling that the M.52 story has fallen neatly into this category. I’d like to be proved wrong but I don’t think any evidence has emerged to support the data exchange theory. It might well have happened but it may have been a much more simple and less important act that we’ve been led to believe?

January 6, 2009 at 10:10 pm in reply to: Miles M.52 and the X-1 – again! #1170674

Chox
Participant

I certainly won’t be venturing all the way to Kew just to research a paragraph about the M.52! Actually, I could have done what every author does and simply repeat the same information which has appeared for decades, but I thought it might be worth checking if anyone had actually found any evidence to support it! I’m guessing that no such information has been forthcoming, in which case I’ll go with the theory that the cancellation was due to a combination of factors.:)

January 6, 2009 at 10:04 pm in reply to: Hawker Sea Hawk WV910 (ETPS machine) – photos? #1170686

Chox
Participant

Sounds like an intriguing paint scheme – hope somebody comes up with a photograph as I’ve certainly never seen a Sea Hawk in the grey/red scheme either as a flyable machine or grounded instructional airframe. If it did carry those colours, I assume they were applied after her flying career finished?

January 6, 2009 at 2:23 pm in reply to: Miles M.52 and the X-1 – again! #1171199

Chox
Participant

It’s not the overall story that intrigues me – the details are fairly well-known of course. It’s the question of precisely why the information was given to Bell which seems odd. There are countless accounts of how the information was handed-over but there’s never any factual information as to precisely what, when and why. It just seems rather odd that after all these years, there doesn’t seem to be any documentation which explains the terms of the release or (more specifically) the story that it was supposedly part of an exchange deal. It’s all very well for historians to claim that the US failed to deliver their part of the deal but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence which specifies what they were supposedly going to give us, or when, or why they didn’t.

I’m including an account of this saga in my forthcoming Lightning book and at present, I’ve written that the only possible conclusion seems to be that the M.52 cancellation must have been due to a combination of factors, rather than any specific cause, as there’s no evidence which favours any particular reason. Certainly, the Government was almost bankrupt, there was some doubt as to the success of the design, there was probably American pressure to abandon the project so that they could take credit via their X-1 and also pressure from Wallis to give Vickers the rocket-powered model work. Just seems strange that there still isn’t any hard evidence to explain why the M.52 data was given away so freely. I don’t imagine for a minute that the data was handed-over for nothing…

January 6, 2009 at 12:23 am in reply to: Miles M.52 and the X-1 – again! #1171800

Chox
Participant

Yes, I saw a thread on this subject from a while back.

Thing is, the “no money” argument doesn’t really add-up. Firstly, loads of cash was then spent on scale model tests and then another requirement was ultimately issued which resulted in the FD and P1. I’m sure lack of money was part of the problem but you get the impression that there must have been some sort of motive for giving-up the project and all the data associated with it… and yet there doesn’t seem to be any evidence.

But regardless of this, it just seems odd that there doesn’t seem to be any concrete factual information on the release of the M.52 data, nor any indication as to what was expected in return for giving it to Bell. I just get the impression that the whole story has got so clouded through endless repetition, that the actual facts are as elusive as ever?

January 5, 2009 at 11:00 pm in reply to: Hawker Sea Hawk WV910 (ETPS machine) – photos? #1171845

Chox
Participant

I haven’t seen any photos of any Sea Hawks in that kind of paint scheme before, but it would appear to be what was a fairly standard paint scheme at Boscombe Down back in the early 1970’s. A fair few Hunters were painted in light grey with red trim (as was their Jet Provost, some Canberras, etc.) so I would imagine the Sea Hawk received the same colours, although I guess it’s possible that the aircraft was only used as a ground instructional airframe by the time it was painted. Would be fascinating to see a photo of the whole aircraft in that paint scheme though – flying or otherwise! My hunch is that it never actually flew in the grey/red scheme though as I would imagine at least one photo would have emerged by now?! Maybe just the nose section was painted-up after being detached from the rest of the airframe?

January 2, 2009 at 12:25 am in reply to: Plastic Model Kits #225188

Chox
Participant

Think you ought to take a look at Trumpeter’s current catalogue – they’re tackling an awful lot of subjects that haven’t been produced in a larger scale before.

Re- the Airfix 24th Mustang, it’s not a bad kit but it is pretty old now. There are certainly more detailed kits of the Mustang available now which you might prefer.

The 24th Mosquito is due to be released next year. It isn’t based on the 48th kit, in fact the contrary is the case. The Airfix 24th Mosquito was originally planned many years ago as a follow-on to their 24th Harrier but the company had a slight loss of nerve at the time and opted to scale-down the Mosquito to 48th scale. In effect they’re now producing what was originally planned a long time ago. Their 72nd TSR2 kit which appeared a year or so back was an example of another kit planned many years previously but never released – that’s partly why it’s not quite up to the standards of most modern kits. Their new 48th TSR2 (due out in a month or so) is, by comparison, a “new-build” kit.

January 1, 2009 at 10:35 pm in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1175640

Chox
Participant

I don’t know how many times I or others have to explain this obvious point to you bubble. The figures are already published for you to see for yourself. Make your own judgement and kindly stop whining about me, as you’re the one who seems to be taking-on the characteristics of a broken record, not me.

I don’t know how either I or anyone else could simplify the matter for you any further. Either you think Pleming is worth the amount of money that he’s evidently taken, or you don’t. Personally, as I’ve said, I’m with the people who think it’s a ridiculously huge amount of money for relatively little work, and in the (willful) absence of any justification for this amount of money, I’ll stick to that view thanks! Maybe that’s clear enough for you?!

January 1, 2009 at 9:18 pm in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1175899

Chox
Participant

yup – I’m one of ’em:D

January 1, 2009 at 4:33 pm in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1176325

Chox
Participant

David, come back when you have a clue what you’re talking about. Back to 558 now perhaps?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 811 through 825 (of 935 total)

← 1 2 3 … 54 55 56 … 61 62 63 →