I must say…. if he is a real chap and not a ‘Troll’ then i all i can say is good luck to him!!!

Personal opinion is that he is a ‘Troll’. When Daz asked him about a home-built type just a few threads earlier he was very quick to say that he was considering a scale Spit. Has he ever mentioned that option before? No. So why did he bite so quickly? Because he knows that this will get a response from Daz.

It’s all about getting attention, that’s all.

Sorry to say that I cannot help you with any tips about headset bags, I just stow mine in a sturdy pilot case. Probably best to look around the smaller pilot stores for the cheaper brands.

Thanks Steve Y, for the kind comments, did you manage to take a decent shot of the Invader, unfortunately for some reason I only took one photograph of the aircraft from the rear! if you could post one it would fill a gap.

Here’s my attempt at an Invader photo, taken in May 2003:

Good quiz James.

It is the ‘Schrek FBA Type H’ which is in the Brussels Military Museum.

Funny thing is that I found the photo I took of it and still couldn’t figure out what it was 😀

Edit: for the curious amongst you: http://www.rudi-geudens.be/html/oorlogsmuseum_wo1_vlieg.htm
Photo by me in May 2003:

JSC R.E. Alexeiev Central Hydrofoil Design Bureau KM a.k.a. ‘The Caspian Sea Monster’.

C.3603-1 Schlepp http://www.caf-sss.ch/06_Fotogalerie/PhotoGallery/C36/d_C36.htm

That’ll teach me to spend 2 minutes looking at a photo 😀 😀 😀

Indeed MEANT to be safe James. Remember that up until it explodes it is still a solid package that will easily go through a windscreen 😮

With the bursts as close as they look on Albert Ross’ photos I’m surprised that the pilots volunteered to fly through it! My option would’ve been to have the flak bursts in an otherwise empty bit of sky, and fly along a line that passes through the flak from the camera’s standpoint, but is actually behind the flak field. The downside is that you can only film from one or two angles, which means more runs for different camera angles, but it is safer in the end! Leaves less dents in wings too! 😉

The rather blunt Rotol spinners used on Mk.I Hurricane during the Battle of Britain are interchangeable with latter spinners. In fact CM/1, ES/6 & ES/9 spinners are all interchangeable. My guess is that it would cost far too much to have a one off spinner made.

Spinners are indeed not cheap to make, but for a restoration like this, I would have thought they would go the extra mile if the blunt type can be fitted to the RX5 hub.

Just playing advocate of the devil, but that still leaves the question of whether the CAA will issue the Permit with the blunt spinner! If ‘The extra mile’ includes convincing the CAA about the airworthiness of a component that hasn’t been seen on an airworthy Hurricane for 60 years, then the newer type spinner would definitively be the healthier option! 😉

Mike J posted a list of airworthy Hurri’s, how many of those use the blunt spinner (none I’m guessing) and how many Hurri’s have used it during say the past 20 years?