PMN1If anyone serves flak over British aviation industry missing out on opportunities it’s British politicians – who consistently dashed the prize out of British manufacurers’ hands just when it was within reach.
Given what happened to British aviation, did it loose anything by the M52 not flying?
PMN1Were the Orion and Tyne ‘clean sheet’ designs or did they owe something to previous turboprops (Proteus/Orion and Clyde/Tyne)?
PMN1How did Hyfil compare to today’s composites?
PMN1Ok, so the timing suggests that Dassault got little if anything from the FDII tests, but could the 103B have been developed into a Mirage equivalent?
Derek Wood goes onto say ‘It is recorded in Mirage, Warplane of the World by Jack Dee that ‘later when the Mirage was conquering markets all over the world, Dassault told a British aircraft chief, “If it were not for the clumsy way in which you tackle things in Britain, you could have made the Mirage yourselves”.’
PMN1How did the Tyne compare to the Clyde?
PMN1Well, thanks to the link, I finally have a clue what you are talking about.
Interesting… but probably a bit large* for anything but a missile-fighter/strike bomber… similar to the later F-111.
* only 5 feet longer than the Mirage III, but 10 feet 8 inches greater wingspan (37’7″ vs 26’11”), which matches that of the Mirage IV. This would adversely affect roll rate, and thus slow its ability to initiate/terminate turns… but should improve sustained turn rate.
The B version was apparently smaller with a span of 28ft, length 54.67ft and an all-up-weight with 200gal fuel in external tanks of 20,650lb.
PMN1Well, from reading ‘Project cancelled’ Dassault got a lot of information for its Mirage series from this.
Testing over built up areas in the UK was banned so Fairey had to test its Delta II in France……
You look at the fairey design and superimpose the Mirage over it and, well……
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3074.0.html
PMN1If Whittle’s LR1 turbofan had been built, would an uprated version have fitted inside the wings?
PMN1Basing at Gibralter?
Has anyone seen this?
http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/4827
Grabbed this from Pprune….
“The Royal Navy continues to study the idea of making Gibraltar the home of one of the new aircraft carriers, says UK report. Plans for a carrier base have been in development for several years. The idea would make Gibraltar home to one of Britain’s two new aircraft carriers along with the support fleet that accompanies it. The fleet would serve as a rapid response force.
The Rock has become a key area of interest for the Ministry of Defence over the last few years. It already serves as a crucial logistics base for UK forces operating in the Mediterranean and the Middle East, says Public Servant Daily. It is also a frequent layover point for Royal Navy ships and has recently become a crucial training ground for naval and air force personnel preparing to deploy to the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operation.
“This makes a scenario where a carrier fleet is permanently stationed in the city more likely,” says the report. The increased emphasis on law enforcement and anti-smuggling operations have seen more Royal Navy ships using Gibraltar as a base as well.
It adds: The MoD sees the building of a permanent aircraft carrier base a way of reducing costs, increasing its presence in the Mediterranean, and allowing for easier deployments throughout the world.”
http://www.panorama.gi/localnews/headlines.php?action=view_article&article=2811&offset=0
Some info on Gibralter
http://www.gibraltarport.com/html_files/maritime_services/ship_repair/cammell_laird.html
Some older info on Gibralter
http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/gibraltar_dockyard.htm
PMN1There has been some talk in the FT in the past few months about a staute for Keith Park
A collective memory failure
By Mrs Moneypenny
Published: September 15 2007 00:21 | Last updated: September 15 2007 00:21
September 15 will be a day of celebration for the people gathered for the marriage of two friends. It is his second and her third, so by now they should know how to throw a party, and I’m sure it will be a day we remember.
Some 67 years ago, in 1940, September 15 became a day of celebration for millions. This day is now commemorated – albeit decreasingly so as that generation dies out – as Battle of Britain Day. The largest concentration of enemy aircraft ever seen came across the English coast that day, but was defeated by the Royal Air Force’s Fighter Command, whose airmen had been so famously praised by prime minister Winston Churchill a few weeks previously: “Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.”
Last time I referred to a historic figure in this column, Alexander Hamilton (1755-1804), I mistakenly called him Thomas. The only good outcome was that many of you wrote in about it, and it was good to “meet” you all. Many Americans owe much to Hamilton, not least those who work on Wall Street – he helped found the Bank of New York and promoted the development of the New York Stock Exchange. It is no surprise that there are many statues to him, one of the finest in Central Park.
Here in Britain, we are not quite so good at commemorating our heroes. In my opinion there were three principal architects of the historic victory that was the Battle of Britain: R.J. Mitchell, Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding and Sir Keith Park. Mitchell designed the Spitfire, the legendary aircraft, and there are many tributes to him, including statues in Stoke-on-Trent and at Solent Skies museum in Southampton; busts at Southampton university and the RAF Club, London, and a memorial stone on the site of the Supermarine works, Woolston. There is also my favourite statue of him, by Stephen Kettle, at the Science Museum in London.
Dowding is commemorated by the famous statue in the Strand, outside St Clement Danes church, where my friends’ wedding reception will be today. I commend it, and its inscription, to those of you who have a spare moment. (Goldman Sachs in London – you’re nearby. Now that the markets have slowed down and there are fewer pressing deals to be done, why not walk up and take a look?) There are also memorials in a park in Moffat, Dumfriesshire, the town of his birth; in Royal Tunbridge Wells where he died; and there is a bust of him at Winchester College, where he went to school. His ashes are interred in Westminster Abbey, and the Dowding Centre at the School of Fighter Control at RAF Boulmer is named after him.
But what of Sir Keith Park? A New Zealander by birth, who had survived two of the bloodiest battles of the first world war, he is, in my opinion, perhaps the most influential of the three. I am not alone. In 1947, Lord Tedder, then in charge of the RAF, said: “If any one man won the Battle of Britain, he did. I do not believe it is realised how much that one man, with his leadership, his calm judgment and his skill, did to save not only this country but the world.”
What memorials are there to this man, whose marshalling of men and machines ultimately put paid to Hitler’s goal of invading Britain? Well, there’s an aviation collection and a school in New Zealand, a road named Keith Park Crescent in Biggin Hill, Kent, and … er … that’s it. I think this is a disgrace, and before Sir Keith Park’s memory is extinguished, let us correct it. I see that the personal interests of our current Air Chief Marshal, Sir Glenn Torpy, include military history (as well as hill walking and cabinet-making), so perhaps I should try to meet him and press my case. I’ll keep you posted.
As far as I am aware, apart from the crescent in Kent the only UK memorial to Sir Keith Park is locomotive number 34053, one of the Battle of Britain class, commissioned by the Southern Railway in 1947. After a series of owners, and being sold at one point for spare parts, it is now safely in the hands of Southern Locomotives Limited, a not-for-profit organisation that restores, maintains and runs steam locomotives.
Fitting monument for Sir Keith Park
By T.C Smith
Published: September 22 2007 03:00 | Last updated: September 22 2007 03:00
From Mr T.C. Smith.
Sir, I would like to express my delight at the subject of Mrs Moneypenny’s column “A collective memory failure” (FT Magazine, September 15), and my agreement with her.
It has been said that Fighter Command in 1940 was a weapon that Air Chief Marshal Lord Dowding devised, Winston Churchill decided to use, and Sir Keith Park wielded in battle. There are monuments to the first two but none of any significance to Park, who commanded No. 11 Group RAF, which was responsible for the air defence of London and the south-east of England. Park was the field commander of the most critical area during the greatest and most significant aerial battle in history.
I would like to help to correct this lamentable situation by commissioning the construction of a statue of Sir Keith Park. I would like to obtain support from your readers for the sitting of such a statue.
In my view, it should be placed on the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square. Why? Because Park, more than any other individual, saved London, and Trafalgar Square is at the centre of the city. The fourth plinth is also within sight of New Zealand House, home of the High Commission of New Zealand, and Park was of course a New Zealander.
Please can you restore my waning faith in this era of celebrity for its own sake and moral bankruptcy by supporting the proposition that we should commemorate this remarkable man’s contribution to saving our city, our country and indeed the free world?
T.C. Smith,
Chief Executive, Tullett Prebon
Chairman, Collins Stewart
London EC2V 7QR
PMN1What if the Men from the Ministry had allowed Whittle to continue with his LR1 Turbofan – about 50-80% complete when PowerJets were ordered to stop work on all engines.
Whittle was looking at around 6,000lb thrust.
The government didn’t even use its powers to give the idea to an established aero-engine company – talk about wasted years.
PMN1This site has been pointed out to me elsewhere.
PMN1If you watched the programme properly, you might have noticed that Kittinger was wearing a pressure suit…. 🙂
I vaguely remember reading it developed a leak…
PMN1What did De Havilland have in mind when it decided on scaling down to 45% to produce the Gyron Junior, why not another figure?
Sign In
