Spare wheel on an MGB?

Any chance of a larger scan of the second image? I just cannot make out what is written at the bottom. The writing on the first one is ‘De smokkel Cat’ which indeed translates as the smuggling Cat, but the second image seems to have more writing on it.

ZK-LIX (La-9) is for sale on the courtesy website here: http://www.courtesyaircraft.com/

That implies that she’s a flier but whether she has flown recently is the big question of course.

One of the Piece of Cake Spitfires is preserved in Best, Holland. Just had a look at the site of the Kent BOB Museum, but there is a lot of “no’s” (no camera’s, no video, no notebooks) involved when paying a vistit overthere. Well, they must have there reasons, but under those “rules”, I have “no” interest in paying a visit. BW Roger

I went there a few years ago and while it was an interesting visit, I found the rules needlessly restrictive. It is quite a nice museum but they could lighten up a bit, or at least make up for the ‘no photos’ bit by providing photos or postcards for sale. I recall that they had a few but they weren’t that great.

Prop design is somewhat similar to wing design, just a lot more complex. If you look at the Spitfire as a handy example, more and more power was shoehorned into a mostly unchanged airframe. If you add more power to the same prop, it will turn faster. More speed means more power but at some point the tips will try to go supersonic and you’ll need to change something, either gear it down or add blades. More blades mean more drag, keeping the rpm in a reasonable range, and more lift i.e. more thrust which is why you added the power in the first place. The basic idea behind it is still the lift formula, in that you can get more lift (=thrust) by adding speed or surface area. To add surface area you can create longer blades, broader blades or more blades. On the spitfire the last one was the best option as longer blades were not possible without changing the airframe/gear and broader blades wouldn’t be enough (there are performance penalties as well with those).

Another thing to keep in mind is that as you add blades, the hub becomes more complex as well. Also, as said before, blades influence each other. Because of this more than five blades didn’t come into fashion until our knowledge of aerodynamics caught up.

Hmm, not a very clear story now that I read through it again but it’s the basics in a nutshell I think.:cool:

So, if I read the above correctly, it seems a DC3 operator in a European country that also happens to be a member of the EU, was not aware of, or had to comply with this new directive, but a UK based operator has? :rolleyes:

How ridiculous.

Bear in mind that a comment by the pilot or other crewmember is not the same as speaking to ‘a DC-3 operator’. At least one of the organisations mentioned above is well aware of the changes and has actively sought a solution with the assistance of the local authorities in the form of an exemption from EASA for certain changes/modifications. This process is still ongoing and at least while the exemption has not been denied the aircraft will continue to operate. Expectations are that passenger operations will continue.

With all new regulations it takes time for everyone to adjust to them, that goes for operators, local authorities and Brussels. I don’t know the precise situation between the CAA and the UK operators but as far as I know passenger flying is not prohibited for DC-3s, there are just new rules to follow if you want to do this. Depending on the standpoint of the CAA (which I don’t know) it may also have been the operator’s choice to suspend passenger ops.

The name was ‘Bayerische Flugzeugwerke’, for the rest I’ll go with FW190uk’s theory.

Wikipedia also has a page about this by the way, quote:

BFW was reconstituted as Messerschmitt AG on July 11, 1938, with Willy Messerschmitt as chairman and managing director. The renaming of BFW resulted in the company’s RLM designation changing from Bf to Me for all newer designs after the acquisition date. Existing types, such as the Bf 109 and 110, retained their earlier designation in official documents, although sometimes the newer designations were used as well, most often by subcontractors. In practise, all BFW/Messerschmitt aircraft from 108 to 163 (not the same plane as the Me 163) were prefixed Bf, all later types with Me.

Sounds like it was a good day. Can anyone post some more photos? Both from the air display and the engine runs perhaps? I would’ve loved to be there myself but it was a bit too far away unfortunately. (Hi N. All well I hope?)