dark light

Archer

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 1,614 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Duxford Diary 2019 #789301
    Archer
    Participant

    I must have missed something… can someone explain what a Spitfire V ‘evocation’ is?

    in reply to: North East Land, Sea And Aircraft Museum Diary #789670
    Archer
    Participant

    Thanks for keeping us updated on this! It’s good to hear things are moving within that Vulcan! Just curious, but will you need to do any work on gear/brakes before applying sparks? Or is that big, triangular test stand bolted down firmly enough to withstand a bit of a push from an Olympus?

    Archer
    Participant

    Why does the Vimy have neither military serial or civil registration ?

    Because the first permanent British civil register came into force on 22 July 1919, a month after the Trans-Atlantic flight. It was a civil aeroplane at the time, but the requirement to have a registration (or a certificate of airworthiness) wasn’t there yet. A temporary scheme had been started on 1 May 1919, but as far as I can tell the Vimy wasn’t registered in the K-sequence that was used. And after its undignified arrival in Ireland, the Vimy would not fly again so there was no need to retroactively register it.
    More about this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United…t_registration

    in reply to: Great news- JU AIR Junkers 52s WILL fly again ! #790905
    Archer
    Participant

    https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48057149898_728ca126eb_c.jpg
    Hermeskeil_Ju52_Oct2013 by Jelle Hieminga, on Flickr
    https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48057165857_8bf0398fdb_c.jpg
    JuAir_HBHOS_Aug2014 by Jelle Hieminga, on Flickr
    Two can play that game 😉

    in reply to: Pitot mount /mast pressure head 27V #791588
    Archer
    Participant

    It looks very similar to the dual pitot on a VC10. According to the paperwork they used Avimo types PH1469B and PH1468B (L and R). I don’t have an IPC to check for other part numbers unfortunately.

    in reply to: '' THAT'S ALL BROTHER " #792457
    Archer
    Participant

    Depending on the engine type, some starters are ‘direct-drive’, where the engine turns as soon as the starter turns. On these, you can have a shear pin in the connection that lets go when too much resistance is encountered. This should prevent the system from bending a rod or busting something due to hydraulic lock, and on these engines you can turn the engine over a set number of blades on the starter, before switching on the ignition.

    On the B-25, the R-2600 engine has an inertia starter. In this setup the starter turns a flywheel, once this is up to speed you use the ‘mesh’ switch to engage the clutch, this transfers the energy from the flywheel to the engine by connecting the two. With this setup, a hydraulic lock would end up in a busted something as the energy in that flywheel will have to go somewhere. And you can’t include a shear pin, as it would probably go once every start whenever you hit ‘mesh’. The inertia system allows the starter to overcome a larger initial resistance in larger engines, with larger compression figures, but it introduces a risk as well as it is easier to bust something. Because of that, pulling the engine through a couple of times by hand is a sensible precaution. The number of blades you use for that is dependent on the prop gearing and the requirement to at least have every cylinder go through a complete intake – compression – expansion – outlet cycle. The first link in tbyguy’s post above explains this a lot better than I can.

    in reply to: Problems with BEA Pilots in 1960s / early 1970s #793210
    Archer
    Participant

    I’ve read a few biographies from ex-BOAC pilots, and several mention that when the first newly-minted pilots from Hamble turned up, the older generation didn’t think much of them. They had only a couple hundred hours experience, no wartime experience, not even a military background, and they were young. It took a while before they were convinced of the usefullness of these young ones, perhaps that played a role as well.

    in reply to: Last of the Doolittle Raiders #800981
    Archer
    Participant
    Archer
    Participant

    Looks like a new exhibit has arrived at this museum: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-47937081

    in reply to: Record attempt P-51 story. #811678
    Archer
    Participant

    Flockhart’s intention was to beat the England to Australia (Australia to England in this instance) air speed record still held by Arthur Clouston and Victor Ricketts in the DH88 Comet G-ACSS Grosvenor House from the 1934 England to Australia Air Race.

    Small correction: The original record set during the 1934 MacRobertson Air Race was set by Charles Scott and Tom Campbell-Black. Arthur Clouston and Victor Ricketts flew to Australia and back in 1938, not as part of any race but to beat the 1934 record. They missed out on Scott and Campbell-Black’s record but did set a new London-Sydney record, as well as some other records during their trip out and back.

    in reply to: Transatlantic Air Race Harrier to Brooklands Museum #811746
    Archer
    Participant

    Announcement is here: https://twitter.com/BrooklandsMuseu/status/1109160313818152962
    It will be at Brooklands for two years, looking forward to seeing it there.

    in reply to: Red Bull B-25 with engine problem #811751
    Archer
    Participant

    Sounds like it might get expensive…

    in reply to: Douglas Baders Travelair G-APUB #812661
    Archer
    Participant

    The is an anomaly on the FAA database in that for Beech 95 c/n TD-240 it shows a build date of 1982. The CAA database does have TD-240 as the c/n of G-APUB registered in 1959, but interestingly they didn’t record the build date. It must however have been 1959 or earlier.

    I suspect that the date of manufacture in the FAA database has been influenced by the fact that the N-number wasn’t issued until June 1982. They may have created that field at a later stage and filled it using the date of first registration.

    Edit: I noticed that TD-80 is still around, and was built in 1958. For TD-219, a date of manufacture of 1959 is mentioned. Based on that, 1959 seems a reasonable assumption for the build date of TD-240.
    I also found a nice period photo from 1960: https://www.airhistory.net/photo/112233/G-APUB

    Elmdon boy, you could try contacting the photographer through this page: https://abpic.co.uk/pictures/view/1056262
    He appears to know, or knew, a bit about the whereabouts.

    Archer
    Participant

    Thanks for sharing that, looks good and sounds even better! Does anyone know if the jets are operational? Or are they sticking to pure piston power?

    in reply to: British post-war commercial aircraft survivors #816647
    Archer
    Participant

    Interesting to see this thread again, I had forgotten about it. In the meantime we’ve gone from 15 active VC10s and 4 preserved to 9 preserved examples (one is only a fuselage), with several incomplete fuselage sections and nose sections as well.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 1,614 total)