dark light

FoxVC10

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 224 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: What is this Attitude Indicator from? #1048821
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    The KAJ0101 is probably the part number of the unit. Not a Kelvin and Hughes parts number but more likely Smiths.

    The face of the instrument may have the manufacturers name stamped on it. It will be black on black so not easy to see.

    The 24KHI/56 is probably the serial number of the unit. /56 probably being the year of manufacture (perhaps – never 100% sure with Smiths if it is Smiths manufactured).

    Looks like a Desynn indicator but a bit bigger ( a large family of indicators) as manufactued by Smiths.

    Are there any stamps at the bottom of the label (a place name or similar if readable – RNSD Perth, Almondbank, Fleetlands and possibly a date) or on the reverse of the label.

    Not sure what it is, but as its NIV its perhaps a test piece or similar. My guess is Skyraider.

    Someone mentioned somehwere that Smiths had a private museum of old stuff in Gloucester…maybe give them a shout.

    in reply to: On the runway at Hixon #1064436
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    must be running out of space with all the surplus stuff coming in!

    in reply to: More mystery objects #1064444
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    Look American(ish) to me possibly

    Harrier GR5 or similar???

    – yes I know its British but a lot of the design stuff was done in the US.

    Any part number or stamp on the bolt heads?

    in reply to: Mystery instrument panel #1070952
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    Sea Prince C2 (not T1) – sorry should of said that..

    On the T1 instrument panel the make up of the part number is K57-80-00…

    On the C2 its K66-80-10…

    in reply to: Mystery instrument panel #1071112
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    Percival Sea Prince – 100% sure

    in reply to: De Havilland dH104 Dove /Devon #1021273
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    I have the airframe repair manual if you are interested.

    in reply to: De Havilland dH104 Dove /Devon #1030362
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    I have the airframe repair manual if you are interested.

    in reply to: Grass Cutting C47 style! #1038626
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    Cameraman kneels down, so he isnt standing up.

    To those who think this is fun….remember South Cerney????

    The Herc was higher than that.

    in reply to: OP Agila Rhodesia 1979 #1043856
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    TonyT your memory is unfortunatley correct about the wire location

    in reply to: Never seen before photos #1049148
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    Phntoms are definitley at Wattisham.
    What year was it? I was probably there.

    in reply to: A great image from 305th BG USAAF #1049793
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    great photo.

    Could the bloke be about to climb up onto the aircraft to attach straps or something, and using a harness?

    Just one of 89 USAAF accidents that day in 1944.

    in reply to: Hunter generator overhaul manual? #1052410
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    Do you/they know the AP number?? or the part number for the generator?

    in reply to: Buccaneer Painting A.P #1060526
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    I have one but its for an S1 in Anti Flash White….

    in reply to: Tornados in WW3 #1076684
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    The use of JP233 wasnt liked by the Aircrew for obvious reason, however the majority of the Tornado losses were aircraft using 1000lbs on laydown or lofting attacks (the one I lost was a 1000lb toss on a radar site when it took a SAM).

    When the move from low level attacks took place – not due to the losses but due to the reduction in the Iraqi defence network making it easier and safer to attack targets (more along with the American viewpoint)- a discussion about the possibilty of JP attacks from medium or high level took place. It was very short and the conclusion was that it would of no value what so ever due to the spread pattern of the sub munitions.

    Bearing in mind the qty that had been flown out (only three would fit per flight in the AT fleet) and it was pretty pointless flying them back a large number were buried.

    TIALD from Tabuk and Paveway with Buccs spiking for the Tornados from Bahrain was first used at this point. The Tornados at that point didnt have the capability nor training to provide the spikeing. I cant remember if ALARM – the loitering grey telegraph poles was used right from the start. I seem to remember that we used 200 Paveway LGB kits flown in from a “colony”(sp?) in three days.

    I think there was one medium level loss when the stores detonated soon after dropping.

    I know of a least one “raid” during the low level phase that was called off as they where running in on target due to the amount of AAA.

    A personal viewpoint (and probably totally inaccurate) was that the losses happened due to a slightly lower training build up and “obvious” distractions of Bahrain and to a lesser extent Dharhan than Tabuk. Only one combat loss at Tabuk (not forgetting the two further mishaps).

    If there are inaccuracies its because it was while ago in the mists of my time…. and I became a grandad yesterday!

    Jeez Im getting old.

    in reply to: Tornados in WW3 #1078807
    FoxVC10
    Participant

    Expecting a 20% loss rate If I remember correctly . ’twas a fair while back

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 224 total)