dark light

Graham Adlam

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 1,322 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII? #1118867
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    here we go 🙂 sorry about the poor quaility you may need glasses to read it, at least i do.

    in reply to: Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII? #1118935
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    As previously posted I have quite a bit of paperwork from a Vickers technical sub contract representative 1942 to 46. There are details of day to day procurement of aircraft frames and lots of other parts from various sub contractors. There are numerous complaints about delays in supplying the agreed contracted parts but these all seem to be the result of shortage of material. There are also toing and froings from Vickers to sub contractors on the quality or lack of it on supplied parts. There is no mention of strike action in any of these or sabotage. The quality issues relate to mistakes made in manufacture i.e. wrong size holes that sort of thing. Of coarse the figures on strikes as reported by various posters are fact although it seems that this did not have a significant effect on production. I can only comment on Spitfire production but it seems to have run fairly smoothly.
    Its interesting that the law forbidding strikes does not seemed to be enforced? There was a question raised earlier about the punishment for sabotage, I would have thought that if proven was probably a capital offence?
    Attached are a few examples interestingly enough one relates to delays from EA.
    Doh card reader wont work bear with me 😮

    in reply to: Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII? #1119063
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    We all enjoy a bit of leg pulling from time to time however the tone of the poster in question is inflammatory. There is or never has been any suggestion that Sir Author Harris was a war criminal nore is it acceptable to be-little the factory Workers who were heavily bombed in the UK. Other remarks of finger salutes etc have nothing to do with this thread what so ever. Any present day conflict has no bearing or relevance to this discussion. I see only one particular poster who has offered offence in this respect. This is an interesting thread and I see no reason to suspend it because of the Ill advised and ignorant comments of one poster.

    in reply to: Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII? #1119473
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII?

    Have you read the thread title? frankly nothing you have said so far has made any significant contribution to this thread. You have been and are becoming increasing offensive and irrelevant.

    in reply to: The Mosquito, capabilities under-estimated? #1124708
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    Griffon powered mosquitos’,, thats a great thought. I had similar thought a while back but i was thinking P-51. Little off topic, i was watching some Reno air race practices and all the P-51’s had merlins in them, it struck me nobody had made the natural proggression to the Griffon.

    Thats an interesting question, why didnt the Mustangs get Griffons ?

    in reply to: The Mosquito, capabilities under-estimated? #1124825
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    I dont the skill to make them would be an issue considering that aircraft right up until 1939 were nearly all made of wood. The Spitfire was a very difficult aircraft to build and they managed to turn out 20K plus of those. I am sure had the Mosquito been BC aircraft of choise they would have soon geared up to making them.
    Its always been argued that the Germans lost out in the Bombing war because they did not have a big heavy bomber.
    I think the policy at the time was to drop the biggest tonnage and cause the most destruction,and the Lancaster was the master of the heavy bomb load. I think the US would have well advised to scrap all their B17s and switch to Mosquitoes though it carried just as large a bomb load as a B17.
    The Mosquito was clearly ahead of its time, todays Bombers are small fast and have precise targeting.
    Scrap the Typhoon and start building Mosquitoes. :D:diablo:

    in reply to: Mosquito scrapping photos #1126265
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    That genuinely upset me…

    the only very slightly uplifting moment was the lovely Commer TS3 taking the five Merlins away..

    ..but the guy with the axe..Arrrgghh..!!

    I hate to burst your bubble but my bet is they went straight to the smelters! Interesting shot of the Mosquito burning that would explain the dump I have been excavating recently.

    in reply to: Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII? #1126275
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    I think you just answered the original question. Its seems it didnt stop stikes though over 900 in the first year in the article you posted.

    in reply to: Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII? #1126352
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    If I recall, Roland Beamont made some strong comments about industrial action that delayed Typhoon (Or Tempest ?) production, I can’t recall the exact details..

    It is in interesting topic, if you are at war to essentially protect your democracy, can you deny the democratic right to strike while others are in combat risking their lives (with the right to withdraw from combat)?

    I dont think that democratic rights would maintain your right to strike during war time after all you had no choises if called up and I believe civilian workers were drafted to farms and Factories without choise?

    in reply to: Industrial action, British aircraft industry, WWII? #1126613
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    Alan

    I have quite allot of paper work from a Supermarrine rep 1941 to 46 and although there seem to be delays caused by shortages of material there was never any mention of industrial disputes. I thought it was illegal to go on strike during the War? I believe there was some skiving for want of a better word but I think that the factories actually had staff that would check up on absent workers. I seem to remember there was a program on the subject recently.

    in reply to: Recovered today from airfield dump #1126922
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    Thanks I will ,give that a try, 🙂

    in reply to: Recovered today from airfield dump #1127872
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    Tempting offer Graham, the Forster can be tuned down to filter out surface fragments and find those bigger, deeper lumps. The stainless piece you found is from a radio headset. A lovely example currently on ebay, very reputable seller….

    http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110589904010&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT

    That would amazing if you could find the time.
    Thats certainly one of the more honest sellers on ebay and Hes spot on with the description that they were also used by the RAF I think we just proved that. ;):D How ever the pair I just dug were of coarse worn by DB, he used to call himself Herbert hence the HB initials !!:diablo:

    in reply to: Recovered today from airfield dump #1128015
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    Sounds like you need to run a magnetometer over your field Graham!

    Hello Ian

    Have had the same idea but it would go nuts the surface is so full of metal its a waste of time even using a metal detector. When I have cleared a decent area would like to try it to see whats under the clay. Any chance you pop over for a day?

    in reply to: Recovered today from airfield dump #1128020
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    Could not resist having a quick clean of a few more bits, one has a ceramic green tube with a brass top, I think one might be internals from an instrument, one seems to be a small catch made of stainless and lastly a small brass drum with a stainless lid and reference number ES-695200 appears to have electrical pins sticking out of the top the catch has HB-7 on it.

    in reply to: Recovered today from airfield dump #1128089
    Graham Adlam
    Participant

    In 3rd picture of your last post, the sprung flip cover for starter/fire extinguisher etc etc push button?

    Its got a 27N number on it which as I recall is as you say Fire Extinguisher possibly part of the mosquito. Have decided to get a small mecanical sieve clear all the surface parts and then dig to see if the clay is a capping layer. I have allot the paper work on the airfeild from Kew and it says 200 cat E engines were dumped. I know it sounds like another tall story but it seems strange that all this debris from so many aircraft types is only 18″ to 2ft deep. Every where I dig its the same, dig out 2ft then its solid clay. I know from my experiance as a surveyor that tips sites which i used to monitor are built up of layers of rubbish and soil its aids compation and prevents the whole thing becoming unstable.

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 1,322 total)