Villacoublay must have been some sort of experimental station before the war because when I googled Villacoublay Wind Tunnel it came up with this Flight Global 1950 reference:
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1950/1950%20-%200099.html
It’s about Henri Mignet researching the Flying Flea crashes and says within it “Mignet quickly realised the true position after participating in full-scale wind tunnel experiments at Villacoublay in 1936….he tried 3 different design solutions in succession (conjugated wings. Auxiliary conjugated elevator flaps in the after wing and strongly reflexed aerofoil section in the after wing….)” (I have no idea what a conjugated wing is.)
I think this indicates a biggish wind tunnel, and a reputation for trying “innovative” solutions.
Et Voila
I think I remember that from BBC News at the time. BAC explained how the Jaguar could be a substitute for the Harrier, unless of course I remember wrongly.
What do Cosford now use for the job the JPs did?
Beatties, Wolverhampton as well.
The operator wore a Captain’s uniform and explained how an airport worked, including having little vans with “follow me” on the back of them.


Taken on the Saturday of the MB centre open week
Best wishes Tony. You embody the spirit of why we come to this forum.
Incidentally if you doubt the thoroughness of scrutineers
Unfortunately the quality of scrutineers in car racing varies enormously, so I suspect it would in air racing. On one occasion I watched a neighbour’s Ralt get scrutineered. There was a lot of fuss over the driver’s underwear (wrong labels) but the scrute failed to observe that the seat belts had no bolts holding them in.
Sorry if this is a diversion, but is this really meant to be the final report? Dated 2006 in the footer, spelling errors, typing errors, a section at the back saying “check the appendixes”? Almost as if a draft has been released? I’m not trying to belittle a very thorough and brutally frank technical report, just confused as to why the presentation is so slipshod.
Please can I add my best wishes for a rapid recovery. I think the pilot was interviewed on the PA at Fairford on Saturday and was a real enthusiast – not to say evangelist – for the Bronco. He sounded a great bloke.
In the future I load it up in the commercial sub-forum.
Noooooooooo!
Please stay here.
I feel very pedantic in saying it’s Frazer Nash. My reason for saying is that a sadly departed friend Mark Joseland has just had a book about Archie Frazer Nash published with Trevor Tarring. Whilst it’s inspired by Frazer Nash’s car exploits I understand it deals with the engineering up to the TSR2.
Don McBrearty was apparently the name of the director of the flick where the replica was severely damaged. I mention it (thanks to imdb) so that forumites can avoid any other films they find him connected with.
Several people have mentioned weight distribution. I have never hung around aero engines so it’s a naive question, but the crank and bearings seem a pretty heavy bit of kit to me. I can see that a DOHC arrangement in a high performance military engine would be heavy, but would have expected the valve gear and head of a DH Gypsy-type engine to be not materially heavier than the bottom end. But I stand to be corrected, I’m just asking? (when we used to lift JAP engines in and out of old 500cc F3 cars, which are similar technology, the bottom end seemed heavier).
Yrs in complete ignorance….
Thank you. Great stuff.
Great to see an airline acknowledge its history and a passion for flight…
Sorry, but I live 5 miles from Cosford so I have seen BA’s passion for it’s history.
I went to a talk by Ing Gianpaulo Dallara who designed the Lamborghini 350 in the 1960s and many cars since. When asked which was the better car, the 350 or Ferrari’s 250, he replied that he thought the E-Type was a better car than either.
(We forgot to ask him if a Morris Isis was better than a Maser Quattroporte)