Page 10 – Key Publishing

Rockhopper

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 154 total)

← 1 2 3 … 9 10 11 →

Author

Posts
February 8, 2011 at 8:30 pm in reply to: Avro Shackleton WR963 Project Thread #1126942

Rockhopper
Participant

If they have had dry air in them all this time then chances are they will be okay. They won’t be corroded on the outside as they have never been in salt water like a diving tank might have been. If they have been emptied and the valves left open then thats not a good thing.

February 8, 2011 at 7:59 pm in reply to: BRAINIAC – Airfield Site ?? #1127081

Rockhopper
Participant

They have used Dunsfold as well.

February 8, 2011 at 7:44 pm in reply to: Avro Shackleton WR963 Project Thread #1127086

Rockhopper
Participant

I wonder if the rules for those bottles are the same as for diving cylinders? Mine need as visual inspection (internal and external) every 2.5 years and a full hyrdo test every five years. If they fail (beyond repair) then the testing place is supposed to cut them up so they can’t be reused!

February 8, 2011 at 9:29 am in reply to: Avro Shackleton WR963 Project Thread #1127643

Rockhopper
Participant

We’re hoping to have the bottles inspected but the fittings on the end are difficult to remove. One of them has been handed to the local REME mechs where I work.

They have been informed that despite the proven effectiveness of “big ‘ammers” I want the bottle and its attachment back in one piece. Without glue or weld being involved in achieving that.

I have confidence in them.

😀

Rich

Whats the working pressure of the bottles?

February 7, 2011 at 5:33 pm in reply to: Carrier ops #1128277

Rockhopper
Participant

All interesting stuff guys, many thanks!

February 3, 2011 at 5:52 pm in reply to: Grumman built them tough.. #1133534

Rockhopper
Participant

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LveSc8Lp0ZE&NR=1

February 2, 2011 at 8:57 am in reply to: Dambusters!! Download the 1954 Series Now #1135636

Rockhopper
Participant

Formation 1 (Moehne Dam then anyone who had not bombed go to the Eder)

Gibson
Hopgood
Martin

Young
Astell
Maltby

Maudslay
Knight
Shannon

Formation 2 (Sorpe)

McCarthy
Byers
Barlow
Rice
Munro

Formation 3 (mobile reserve)

Townsend
Brown
Anderson
Ottley
Burpee

The first name is each group is the section leader

Hope this helps (and is correct!!)

January 28, 2011 at 9:12 am in reply to: RAF Millom Aviation & Military Museum Closure #1141435

Rockhopper
Participant

Thanks for that Jon, I’m surprised they made so much, glad I didn’t make the trip now!

January 27, 2011 at 8:51 pm in reply to: RAF Millom Aviation & Military Museum Closure #1141956

Rockhopper
Participant

Jon, any chance of prices for lots:

70
103
105
106
107
108
118

Many thanks!

Paul.

January 27, 2011 at 1:04 pm in reply to: RAF Millom Aviation & Military Museum Closure #1142502

Rockhopper
Participant

Shame they didn’t set it up as a live auction so you could bid on the internet. I’d have had a crack at one or two of the smaller items but its a 360 mile round trip to drive up there!

January 24, 2011 at 8:08 pm in reply to: Chasing Warbirds #1145735

Rockhopper
Participant

Its another Sky show that promises lots but actually delivers very little.

January 24, 2011 at 5:19 pm in reply to: Newark Air Museum Briefing #1145930

Rockhopper
Participant

No more info needed, just curious to see if anyone else had spotted it! 🙂

January 24, 2011 at 3:16 pm in reply to: Newark Air Museum Briefing #1146142

Rockhopper
Participant

Have you had chance to check out those group photographs?

January 4, 2011 at 11:28 am in reply to: Newark Air Museum Briefing #1098121

Rockhopper
Participant

I took my chum over to the museum on Sunday for a look around. We started in the first hut you come to after leaving the shop.
Anyhow, on the wall towards the back of the hut are three photos of large groups of RAF types, they were taken with the old clockwork panoramic cameras. I was telling my friend that if you were quick enough it was possible to stand at the extreme left hand side of the group then once the camera started to move you could run around the back and stand at the right hand end of the group before the camera got there so you would be in the picture twice.
We looked closely at the middle of the three pictures and lo and behold there is a rather smug looking Sgt Pilot who appears at both ends of the group! The look on his face is a classic “i got away with it” kind of look!
Unfortunatly there is no list of names with that picture so we couldn’t identify the man in question!
I just wondered if anyone else had noticed this?

September 6, 2010 at 5:33 pm in reply to: Recent Control Tower Losses… #1158651

Rockhopper
Participant

An issue might be that to convert a watch office into a dwelling would require planning permission for a change of use. For the purposes of Building Regulations approval it would then be treated as a new build and would have to fully comply with all the current regulations regarding thermal insulation, fire, disabled provision etc. The thermal issues would be the most difficult and expensive to comply with.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 136 through 150 (of 154 total)

← 1 2 3 … 9 10 11 →