dark light

Archer

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,021 through 1,035 (of 1,614 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Suggested good reading… please #1427796
    Archer
    Participant

    i havent read many aviation history books heres the list: Rahl (??) Dahl’s book on his time in the desert, First Light, Nine lives, Combat Crew and fighter boys.

    Do you mean ‘Combat crew’ by John Comer? If not (apparently there are more books with that title) I can recommend it. Article here by the way.

    I’ll second Bach’s ‘A Gift of Wings’, and add ‘Stranger to the Ground’, ‘Biplane’ and ‘Nothing by Chance’. Roland Beaumont has also written some good books (autobiographical). Neville Duke’s ‘Test Pilot’ is also a must-read, as well as ‘Fate is the Hunter’ by Ernest K. Gann. I would also try Alex Henshaw’s ‘Flight of the Mew Gull’ and especially ‘Sigh for a Merlin’. ‘Spitfire’ by Jeffrey Quill is an autobiographical account of the development of this great aircraft, and a last one is ‘Reach for the sky’, the biography of Douglas Bader, written by Paul Brickhill.

    That should keep you busy for a while! 😀

    in reply to: Road going Chevy P-51 for sale on ebay #1343325
    Archer
    Participant

    Firebird: your signature is quite fitting for this subject 😀

    As for the Chevy, surely there are cheaper ways to kill yourself? (Probably less fun though)

    in reply to: New Mossies – where to from here? #1346255
    Archer
    Participant

    Strange – Geoffrey de Havilland’s party trick was upward rolls on one engine and there are numerous reports of returning from ops with an engine out. The Mossie’s one of the few twins that seems to have little trouble flying on one.

    Given enough airspeed and altitude, any twin will fly on one engine for a while. The trick is getting the airspeed up to a reasonable figure once you don’t have any altitude to spare.

    The problem with high-performance piston twins like the Mossie is that you cannot just push on full power for fear of torque rolling the aircraft, or at least putting it beside the runway, but without full power available you cannot build up the airspeed. The way to counter the rolling tendency caused by the prop is using the rudder, but the rudder effectivity is a function of airspeed again. So there’s the catch: on some aircraft like the Mosquito there is a gap between the lift off speed and the safe single-engine speed where you don’t have many options. The safe thing to do in such a situation is cut both engines and land straight ahead.

    in reply to: Watch Out over Brize Norton way today! #1346936
    Archer
    Participant

    I understand that the flypast did take place. Anyone with any photos perhaps?

    in reply to: vulcan on travels (well the nose anyway) #1354668
    Archer
    Participant

    Aah, yes, the old ‘look for information before blurting out a reply’ strategy. I knew I had forgotten something! 😀

    By the way, is it just me or does the railing that can be seen between the truck and the white van on the right indicate a low bridge up ahead? When I noticed it I did feel as if the ‘after’ shot might be a sorry sight, but I’m sure Andy would have rather posted that photo, if that had happened.

    in reply to: vulcan on travels (well the nose anyway) #1354711
    Archer
    Participant

    There was a bit in the news recently about cockpits moving to Flixton. Perhaps this was related?

    in reply to: Air to Airs from slides #1356298
    Archer
    Participant

    Hello Tyler,

    I don’t think I’ve got any pictures of your father. I only met him briefly once or twice when he visited Holland in the early 90’s to fly the DBAF B-25. He did leave a lasting memory, if only from his presence and from the stories I heard about him. Are you in touch with anybody from the DBAF? I’m sure there are plenty of stories and photos around, just not in my collection.

    in reply to: Heeeeeeelp #1363763
    Archer
    Participant

    The first one sort of looks like an Augusta A.129, could be a development model for this type.

    in reply to: Some September Aviodrome and Lelystad pics #1370568
    Archer
    Participant

    Here are a few I took about a month ago, including the Nord rebuild. I hadn’t seen the F2 replica in its complete form yet, looks great next to the F7.

    in reply to: Canberra Cockpit forsale! #1371464
    Archer
    Participant

    Is that a Viscount nose I saw next to the Andover fuselage for sale?

    Looks like a Viscount to me!

    in reply to: Some September Aviodrome and Lelystad pics #1371827
    Archer
    Participant

    The latest I picked up about the Connie is that they are planning to move her indoors for the winter to work on the engine there. She is normally kept outside. There are some uncertainties in this plan though!

    I hadn’t seen the F27 in NLM colours yet, looks absolutely lovely! I’ll need to dig out some very old photos to compare it with 😉

    in reply to: Turkish Spitfires: ML411 and MJ147 #1371989
    Archer
    Participant

    Also this is listed for sale:

    A huge collection of various corroded frames, skins etc, none of the parts are airworthy in any way and are offered for sale as souveniers only.

    I’m guessing this is ML411 😀

    in reply to: Converting a .mix image file to something useful #465886
    Archer
    Participant

    Thanks for the tips! I’ll have a go at that, but I suspect that Word will not cooperate as I have tried inserting the image into a file before and it produced an error. The images may all be faulty of course without me knowing it!

    I’ll have a search for those programs.

    in reply to: Grumpy old men? #1376167
    Archer
    Participant

    There are several reasons why Lindbergh’s flight is more famous than Alcock & Brown’s.

    1. The time period….there was more media in 1927 than 1919. Newsreels were new and a lot more people went to see “talkies” in the late 20’s than films a decade before.
    2. Lindbergh was an American so the flight naturally got more play in the US than the Vimy flight. Also, with the Ortig prize there was more of a race atmosphere in the spring & summer of 1927. That too made for more publicity.
    3. He was solo….in a single engine airplane. Without taking anything away from Alcock & Brown, the idea of a lone pilot in a small airplane seemed to be a greater feat than two guys in a converted large bomber. Call it “rooting for the underdog”.. Lindbergh’s success against rivals with greater financial backing is a great story. Here he was, a former mail pilot who begged for money to buy a plane and got one at a rock bottom price from an unknown firm after other manufacturers said no…thinking he’d never make it. If it were a film or novel, you’d never believe it.
    For a period example of how the story struck a chord with people around the world, witness the reaction of the crouds in Paris. That can’t be dismissed as simple PR or as an American nationalistic fantasy.
    4. Destination….Landing in Paris ensured more publicity than landing in an Irish bog.
    5. Throughout history it has been shown that it’s not always the first person to do something (or the greatest or the best) that gets the fame…timing, luck and a lot of other factors decide who gets into the history books.

    Very good summation, but I feel one is missing:
    6. The distance covered. Lindbergh flew from New York to Paris, which is significantly longer than Newfoundland to Ireland. Linking two major cities also seems a lot more practical, and of use to the common man than linking a rocky outcrop with an Irish peat bog. (But that was already covered in point 4 of course.)

    in reply to: How Low Can You Go?? #1376349
    Archer
    Participant

    This photo was taken at Deelen Airbase (The Netherlands) in 1978. It is ex-Hanover Street B-25 “Gorgeous George-Ann” during a display. Photo by P. v/d Horst, scanned from DBAF magazine.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,021 through 1,035 (of 1,614 total)