dark light

mark_pilkington

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,201 through 1,215 (of 1,652 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Google Earth South Pacific "recovery" #1253393
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    BTW on the PBY picture, you would ask yourself: what can it be?

    Had i seen that, I would flag it as a possible. Things don’t just arrive in a desert.

    This wreck is sitting in tidal flats on a beach in the gulf, my first impression was an abandoned ship or Yacht, again its only because I was looking for a PBY that I knew was there that I gave it a second look, and without intact tailplanes it would have simply been a ship/yacht to me.

    Most photos of the wreck show the wing still in place, I later found recent photos that confirmed the wing had collapsed onto the fuselage.

    I’m not suggesting the google search would be a waste of time, but it would be a huge task, there would be many hours of wasted time for those who undertook it, and a high cost for others to go and investigate some of the “possibles”, and many area’s ticked off as being clear that may well be hiding a complete airframe under a tree.

    Again not a reason not to proceed, but it is a different project to enlisting people to find Steve Fossett, and then directing air or ground searches to check possible anomolies?

    I believe GE is a great tool to assist in finding something you believe already exists, not so great for sweeping search areas for items you are not sure were ever there?

    Interesting thread all the same.

    regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: Google Earth South Pacific "recovery" #1253420
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    Mondariz,

    I think its fine to explore this application of google, and if there are people willing to commit their time thats fine too, however from my own use of google for similar purposes I find the high resolution images only seem to exist where someone has a commercial interest to fund their imaging in the first place, and that google consider there is sufficient interest to justify holding those bigger files on its servers.

    With the “Steve Fossett” project someone funded the uploading of fresh hi-resolution images to allow the desktop search to be undertaken, I imagine there will be many SWAPA locations that are still in low resolution imaging that is worthless for such analysis.

    The B25 image above was identifiable as an aircraft due to three key requirements, hi-res image, identifable shape, and clear vegetation.

    Unfortunately even with hi-res images once that B25 was split into its component parts of a long fuselage without tail, wing panels no longer orientated in anyway with their correct position, I suspect it would be impossible to seperate it from other elogated dark/light patches of ground, fallen trees.

    To illustrate how the loss of the basic “cross” of fuselage and wing reduces the ability to identify an aircraft from above, I have taken the liberty of cutting your B25 up and relocating it to other locations in Aitape.

    In this game of “Wheres Wally” the major three sections of the B25 are now split from each other, and located north of your maker but no longer orientated in their correct airframe locations.

    There is another 2 B25’s worth of parts scattered elsewhere ie a total of 9 sections of aircraft, much harder to spot, very much harder to identify “what” they are let alone what type?

    They are still easy to find since you know the shapes etc to look for, but if you were scanning huge areas of jungle images these shapes would not warrant a second glance.

    In all of these cases the objects are still effectively uncovered by trees and foliage, which could not be assumed to be the likely situation of a truelly abandoned wreck that is either in an isolated area, or has eluded the attentions of earlier scrap dealers, or passing aircraft etc

    as I understand it, many of the valuable parts remaining at airfields are canniballised sections of airframe not intact stripped airframes, it is the wrecks, left in the middle of no-where that still have their wings on etc

    To illustrate this with two other real examples I have added the following:

    Below is a GE image of swamp ghost from Justin Taylin’s website, it is very difficult to spot, even though I know its there to look for it. Unless you had a reason to search for it in this location, Swamp Ghost was many miles away from any airfields to encourage you to search that particular patch of the Pacific Islands to stumble onto it.

    Below also is a GE image of the PBY abandoned in Saudi Arabia (One I grabbed myself from GE in researching this airframe for possible PBY parts recovery a couple of years ago)

    It is in open beach with nothing to distract your attention, but took ages to find by search on screen.

    Again, the shift of the wing relative to the fuselage starts to destroy the recognition of it as an aircraft,

    Remove the wing and tailplane as per the photoshopped image and it is unrecognisable.

    ( I see while editing my post you have posted the SG image yourself smiles, making the same point)

    regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: Google Earth South Pacific "recovery" #1253608
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    .
    I strongly suspect the aircraft in the google photo is the B-25 recovered by Monty Armstrong and Charles Darby when recovering wrecks for Dave Tallichet at Tadji, and placed on display at the Aitape High School in 1974, and not abandoned.

    http://screeningroom.com/Aitape3.JPG

    http://screeningroom.com/Aitape1.JPG

    http://mobarrett.net/photos/png_aus/images/AitapeBomber.jpg

    It is rare and historic B25C from the 345 “Bats Out of Hell” Bomb Group (and 9th B25C model built)

    link and text below from Justin Taylins pacificwrecks website.

    While the airstrip might be abandoned, the aircraft is not, and for those who consider this wreck is there for the taking:

    http://www.pacificwrecks.com/provinces/png_aitape.html

    Ataipe High School
    Since the 1974 recoveries at Tadji, one wreck this B-25 was selected for display at the school as a WWII Memorial for the town, and represents one of the last complete American wrecks in the Aitape area. It is a well known ‘landmark’ of the school and town. Over the decades, outsiders have asked the school to purchase the wreck and remove it, to which they have declined.

    It is entirely appropriate that an aircraft display be retained in the battlegrounds as part of the local heritage, what those concerned about its condition and safety, should be considering, instead of “how to liberate it” or “get it airworthy”, is donating funds to get it placed undercover and preserved.

    Your lunch money would probably pay a weeks wages of a labourer, and go along way to getting this aircraft better preserved?, in fact this might be an affordable and realistic project for WIX to get behind??

    http://mobarrett.net/photos/png_aus/images/AitapeLumber.jpg

    http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/b-25/41-12442.html

    (see other pics of the a/c on the link above)

    Aircraft History
    This bomber was the ninth B-25C produced by North American Aircraft. It was originally intended for the Netherlands East Indies Air Force (NEIAF) but was appropriated by the USAAF and assigned to the 3rd BG, 13th BS in Melbourne in early April, 1942 and nicknamed “Feather Merchant”.

    This aircraft participated in the Royce Mission to the Philippines in April, 1942 and was also flown by Criswell.

    Gus Breymann adds:
    “My uncle, Lt. Gustave M. Heiss, and his co-pilot, Lt. Ed Townsend, flew B-25 41-12442 on the Royce Mission to the Philippines in April, 1942.”

    In the 13th BS it was nicknamed “Irene”. On May 25, 1942 with Talley piloting it flew on a bombing mission against Lae. Attacked by Zeros 5 of 8 shot down. On the return flight, it force landed in kunai grass field near Port Moresby from damaged suffered over the target. Afterwards, it was transferred to the 90th BS.

    Next, it was transferred to the 345th BG, 499th BS on November 30, 1943. Regular crew chief was Ridgeway. Nicknamed “Miss Priority” painted below the cockpit on the right side, and flew combat as a strafer until October 20, 1944.

    Taken out of combat service and turned into a “Fat Cat”, supply and transport plane around February 1944 with its armament removed, but still in olive drab paint. Later, it was stripped to natural aluminum finish by July 1944. Then was declared war weary, and transferred to a service squadron around October 1944. At the end of the war, it was abandoned at Tadji Airfield, with its tail removed.

    Recovery & Display
    It remain in a American aircraft boneyard at Tadji with only its tail missing. Recovered by Charles Darby from Tadji in 1974, and as part of the Yesterday’s Air Force export agreement, it was set up as a memorial at Aitape High School in 1974. Charles Darby moved the aircraft, with assistance from Robert Parer who provided the trailer to move the plane to its new location.

    Tail Section From Another Aircraft
    As the tail section was missing from “Feather Merchant”, the tail from another aircraft B-25D “Tin Liz” 41-30074, shot down off Dagua, was recovered and attached to the aircraft for display purposes.

    Charles Darby Adds:
    “Strange that I went to all the trouble of getting fin and rudder assemblies from a shot-down B-25D “Tin Liz” 41-30074 at Dagua, then found the original assemblies buried in sand on the last day of the work, long after we had taken the bomber down to the school.”

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: CA-15 Kangaroo and Lincoln bomber over Melbourne #1254171
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    Colour photo of the CA-15 – no probs – smiles

    http://www.aarg.com.au/PIC_0017.JPG

    http://www.aarg.com.au/PIC_0019.JPG

    http://aarg.com.au/1_CA_5.jpg

    http://www.aarg.com.au/CA1508.jpg

    These are all a 1/6 flying scale model built by Adrian Hopward in Geelong and now on display at the Moorabbin Museum.

    Unfortunately the real CA-15 is poorly recorded in photo or film, and most of the drawings were unfortunately thrown out at CAC accidently in the 1980’s according to CAC guru Keith Meggs.

    (I still havent nailed which book has the shot of the CA-15 from the Lincoln Turret smiles) – now I have, page 169 of the Stewart Wilson book

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: CA-15 Kangaroo and Lincoln bomber over Melbourne #1254205
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    DETAILS OF CA-15 Radial Engines

    Wilson book
    page 176
    1943
    R2800-21 selected to provide high altitude capability
    change in role from high altitude interceptor to low-medium altitude fighter resulted in selection of R2800-10W

    page 184 quotes:

    May 1944
    R2800-10W originally planned – advised unavailable May 1944
    R2800-22 offered as alternative – rejected
    R2800-57W selected – but caused high altitude focus on design

    August 1944
    R2800-57W advised unavailable
    Centaurus considered
    Mid Setember
    Griffon 120 selected

    DETAILS of CA-15 Wing design
    page 181
    Wing section is NACA 66 laminar flow section with wing span reduced (from original 40′ ) to 36′ due to intended low altitude role.

    (The NACA 66 wing airfoil is the same as selected by NAA for the P-51)

    DETAILS OF CA-15 Test Flights
    In regards to the test flight photos from a Lincoln, these are not referred to, or reproduced in the Wilson book, there are few shots of the CA15 in flight but there is one well known (until you look for it!!) “nose on shot” that is clearly taken from the rear turret of a Lincoln, it is assumed this is during the second period of testing at APU/ARDU between 1948 and 1950.

    If that is the case it is most likely to be A73-13 which served with ARDU exclusively with before being burnt at Point Cook, or alternatively A72-41 which was with ARDU for a while for trials of the Merlin 102.

    DETAILS of the CA-15 Compared to the P51.

    As to the true comparison of the CA-15 to the Mustang, or other aircraft, it was a later generation design which had the benefit of wartime learnings and hindsight, and its performance figures should then be impressive, but those figures – (while unloaded with weapons etc) are from its prototype without any design evolution of engine or airframe as might have happened if it went into production.

    It is all a mute point, but the opinion of someone who should know is that of Australian Test Pilot John Miles.

    He first solo’ed on an AVro 504K in 1925 and during the war was a pilot with the RAAF Test section, flying experience gained there included Avro Cadet, Anson, Battle, Beaufort, Beaufighter (DAP and Bristol), Demon, Hudson, Lancer, Tigermoth, Mothminor, Kittyhawk, Oxford, Vengeance, Ventura, Spitfire mark V and VIII, Wapiti, Wirraway, Lancaster, Lockheed 12, Norseman, Mosquito, Lightning and Thunderbolt.

    In 1944 He became the DAP Test Pilot on Beauforts and Beaufighters at the Fisherman’s bend Factory and in 1946/47 he attended the Empire Test pilots course at Cranfield and flew many UK base aircraft during that time, including the vampire and meteor.

    In 1947 became the chief test pilot for both CAC and GAF, in that role he test flew all of the remaining CAC Mustangs from A68-101 onwards to A68-200.

    He flew the prototype Pika and Winjeels, the Wright Cyclone powered Beaufighter, long nose Lincoln prototype and first Australian built Canberra.

    in 1950 he was back in the UK flying with the RAE at Farnborough and flew the DH108, a Saphire engined Lancaster, python engined Lancaster, and adder engined Lancaster, mamba powered Dakota, Vickers 510 and Hawker P1052, and at Farnborough a ME163 without power – towed by a Spitfire, and by 1953 when he retired he had over 20,000 hours in 200 different types.

    In 1950 after the Farnborough display John was given the opportunity to fly many of the Shuttleworth aircraft by “Dicky” Martin, including the 1908 Bleriot, Avro 504K, Sopwith Camel, and SE5a.

    I offer all of the above background on John Miles to put his comments below in context, few would be in the position of having flown the CA-15 and his other experienced types to argue with him……….

    Page 116, TESTING TIME, John Miles & John Pescott, 1979, Rowick Printers

    I must say that it is the finest fighter aircraft with piston type engine I have ever flown. This includes the Spitfire up to mk 8 (I later flew the Spitfire MK 35), the Typhoon, the Tempest, the Kittyhawk types E and N, the Thunderbolt, the Lightning and the Mustang. The CA-15 had a top speed in level flight of 450 MPH and a range of over 2500 miles. Its handling characteristics were delightful and the performance exceeded that of the Mustang.

    The rest of us will need to look at photos and imagine

    regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: paul cunningham & steve bond – "you have mail" #1255635
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    Steve,

    some weeding now done, I will get you an email contact, given the leadtime you have.

    (hadnt checked the original post regarding your timing when I PM’d you this evening)

    regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: The Forum Virtual Aviation Museum #1255644
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    I am pleased to advise the successful “placement” of “Sea Witch” – Consolidated PBY-5A “A24-387” N68756 into a Private Australian Collection, the owners will identify themselves and publicise their acquisition in their own time, however I am pleased to confirm it will be coming to Australia, for long term restoration and eventual static display.

    consequently I have corrected the list below to reflect the change of ownership:

    regards

    Mark Pilkington

    Airspeed Horsa mkII wing and fuselage sections + skinning, minor fittings. (AS Horsa)
    Auster J1/N Autocrat G-AJPZ frame (Rlangham)
    Auster J/1 ? frame (Ritch & Max)
    Auster AOP.9 XK421 frame (XM692)
    Avro Anson C.21 anon’ cockpit (RossMcNeill)
    Avro Anson GR1 EG426 – Static Project (Mark P)
    Avro Lincoln B2 RF342 – Static Project (Mark P)
    Avro Shackleton AEW.2 WL756 nose/cockpit (Camlobe)
    Be2c Replica -airworthy restoration (The Blue Max & Low n Slow)
    Beagle Pup-100 G-AXNL Cockpit (Ritch & Max)
    Beechcraft D.18s G-BKRN -airworthy restoration (philipturland and Texantomcat)
    BAC Lightning 53-671/ZF579 (mjr)
    Blackburn Buccaneer S.2B XX889 (Buccsociety)
    Boeing B-17 Cockpit section-reproduction (B-17man)
    Boeing B-17 Radio room-reproduction (B-17man)
    Commonwealth CA-6 Wackett Trainer A3-167 Flying Project -(Mark P)
    Commonwealth CA-6 Wackett Trainer A3-85 Flying Project (Mark P)
    Commonwealth CA-6 Wackett Trainer A3-156 Static Project (Mark P)
    Commonwealth CA-27 Sabre, A94-983 (Pete.PS)
    Consolidated B-24 Cockpit section-reproduction (B-17man)
    de Havilland Chipmunk ‘pax WP927 (12jaguar)
    de Havilland Chipmunk ‘pax WZ869 (XM692)
    de Havilland Chipmunk ‘pax anon’ (XM692)
    de Havilland Chipmunk PAX WG419 (Texantomcat & philipturland)
    de Havilland Hornet F.MK.1 nose/cockpit – repro’ (dcollins103)
    de Havilland Mosquito B.IV ‘DZ313′ fuselage – repro’ (G Adlam)
    de Havilland Vampire FB.5 VZ193 pod (dcollins103)
    de Havilland Vampire T.11 XD599 pod (philipturland and Texantomcat)
    de Havilland Vampire T.11 XE985 pod (MarkG)
    de Havilland Vampire T.11 XH313 (Vampire)
    de Havilland Vampire T.11 XH328 pod (Bruce)
    de Havilland Vampire T.11 WZ584 (Bruce)
    de Havilland Sea Venom FAW.22 XG692 pod (XG692)
    Douglas C-47A Skytrain / Dakota 111 FL517 nose/cockpit (c-47 Skytrain)
    Douglas C-47B Dakota 111 TS436 of 1943/Starboard wing sparing (AS Horsa)
    English Electric Canberra PR.7 WH773 (BexWH773)
    English Electric Canberra PR.9 XH175 nose/cockpit (RossMcNeill)
    English Electric Canberra T4 WT486 nose/cockpit (sniperUK/2241sq ATC)
    English Electric Lightning F.1 XM144 nose/cockpit (XM172)
    English Electric Lightning F.1A XM172 full airframe (XM172)
    English Electric Lightning F.2 XN769 nose/cockpit (rmc)
    English Electric Lightning T.5 XS420 full airframe (XM172)
    English Electric Lightning T.5 XS458 full airframe (rmc)
    English Electric Lightning F6 XS932 nose/cockpit (XM172)
    English Electric Lightning F6 XS922 nose/cockpit (XM172)
    English Electric/BAC Lightning F.3 XP706 (Scott C)
    Enstrom 280C Shark G-BXEE full airframe (now with main rotors!) (iws)
    Fairey Firefly AS.6 WB440 cockpit/fuselage (HMS Vulture)
    Folland Gnat T.185 ‘XM692’ cockpit (XM692)
    Gloster Meteor NF.14 WS807 (Buccaneer Society/Jet Age Museum)
    Handley Page Halifax B Mk III cockpit reproduction (Cees Broere)
    Hawker Harrier T4 anon’ nose/cockpit (XM172)
    Hawker Hurricane P3554 ‘Jessamy’ (Rocketeer)
    Hawker Hurricane MKII project (G Adlam)
    Hawker Hunter F1 WT648 nose/cockpit (Rocketeer)
    Hawker Hunter F2 WN890 nose/cockpit (Rocketeer)
    Hawker Hunter F5 WN957 nose/cockpit (XG692)
    Hawker Hunter F6 XG290 nose/cockpit (Rocketeer)
    Hawker Hunter T7 XL591 (mjr)
    Hawker Hunter FGA.78 QA12 nose/cockpit (MarkG)
    Hawker Sea Hawk F1 WF145 nose/cockpit (HMS Vulture)
    Hawker Sea Hawk FGA.6 WV838 nose/cockpit (wv838)
    Hawker Sea Hawk FGA.6 XE339 fuselage only (wv838)
    Hunting Jet Provost T.3 XN549 nose/cockpit (avroxix)
    Miles M-65 Mk 3A Gemini G-AKEK (galdri)
    Miles Messenger M.2a G-AKIN -airworthy (texantomcat)
    North American AT-6-D-1-NT Texan airworthy restoration G-TOMC (Texantomcat and philipturland)
    North American F86D 51-6151 (Lindy’s Lad)
    Piper PA22 Colt – airworthy. (Moggy)
    VS Seafire Cockpit Project (Rocketeer)
    Slingsby Grasshopper TX/1 WZ820 -airworthy (Texantomcat & philipturland)
    Supermarine Spitfire IX (Stuart Gowans)
    Supermarine Spitfire nose/cockpit (Rocketeer)
    Supermarine Swift F7 XF113 nose/cockpit (BDAC)
    Supermarine Spitfire MkVcTrop cockpit section(Qldspitty)
    Supermarine Spitfire MkVcTrop Reproduction(Qldspitty)
    Supermarine Spitfire MkVIII taxiing replica with a meteor engine (G Adlam).
    Vickers Viscount V.708 F-BGNR (Phantom Phixer & RobMac)

    in reply to: CA-15 Kangaroo and Lincoln bomber over Melbourne #1255990
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    It is better described as a redesign of the Boomerang to achieve Thunderbolt like performance /outputs but then extruded through a P51 shaped template due to neccessity of engine choice.

    It grew out of the CA14A turbocharged Boomerang in 1943, which had pushed the basic “NA-16” based steel tube design to its limits, resulting in the need for a new powerplant, new wing and new fuselage construction, ie a new aircraft.

    Its original design up until @1944 was based on a long range / high altitude fighter requirement with a large radial engine, initially based on a R2800-21, then a R2000-10, then to a R2800-22 but for low altitude fighter as the Merlin powered Mustang had by then been ordered for the high altitude RAAF role.

    Over this time its wing design had evolved from an elliptical wing to a laminer flow wing, reflecting industry evolution or best of breed.

    By mid 1944 construction of the prototype was well underway based on the installation of the R2800, when it became clear that engines would not be available from the USA, and instead the aircraft was re-designed to take the RR Griffon 120, this decision was not authorised until late 1944 further delaying the prototype’s completion.

    Two Griffon 61’s were lent by the UK for use in the prototype and arrived in April 1945, and the liquid cooled engines need for a radiator added the mustang inspired ventral intake.

    From Early 1945 the end of war was in sight and the introduction of jet aircraft being contempated for the future, the CA-15 was relegated to a design implentation project rather than a serious pre-production prototype, it struggled to avoid outright cancellation at the end of the war, but commenced taxi-ing trials in early 1946, and commenced flying trials with the RAAF later that year. An unfortunate wheels up landing in December 1946 saw the aircraft’s flying trials abruptly halted, and due to low priority was not rebuilt and re-flown until may 1948 with a limited flight test program before retirement and scrapping in 1950, as probably the worlds last piston engined fighter development?

    Despite its Mustang appearance it has little in common with the P51 other than basic layout, it is substantially larger in fuselage depth and length than the P51, but is effectively a “clipped wing” in comparison.

    There are no interchangeable parts, the CA-15 undercarriage is unique due to the long reach it required to clear the propellor on take-off, the tailplane has diehedral, the fuselage cross-sections are totally different, the engines are different, the engine mounting methods completely different, the wing aerofoils may be similar due to the mustang’s success with Laminer flow (which continued on into Jets such as the F86), the radiator location was inhereted or inspired by the Mustang as perhaps the most efficient? of the various options previously tried? (in the lower cowl (P40) under the wings (Spitfire) or in the wing roots (Mosquito / Firefly) )

    ………………………..CA-15………………..P-51(D)

    Length………………….36.5’………………….32.25′

    Wing Span……………..36’…………………….37′

    Height…………………..12′ *………………….13.66′ *
    (* note: prop height not airframe)

    Weight (empty)………..7,540 lb……………7,635 lb

    max T/O Weight………12,340 lb…………..12,100 lb

    Engine HP……………….2,035……………….1,695

    Speed (max)…………..448 mph……………..437 mph

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1260822
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    Dr Pleming made a brief appearance on the Radio 4 Today programme at about 06.45 with the…

    “We would have had sponsors if it wasn’t for the credit crunch but if we can just have £150,000 now and then £50,000 a month until the start of the airshow season, the sponsors will flock once they see it flying then”

    … pitch.

    Anything sound familiar?

    Moggy

    Not sure why the sponsors have gone to ground just because of the credit squeeze, lots of businesses still have to advertise, do business with customers, its is either a good marketing opportunity or not, and that could have been determined and locked in before the whole game was started, otherwise it is pie in the sky and wishful thinking.

    As moggy said in a later post, the demographics of the crowds that will see it, and how they associate with the sponsor will dictate how much someone will put on the table, without a corporate colour scheme or very large logo it unfortunately “wont fly” – so to speak.

    Lots of companies put money on the table for good causes without any advertising return, but not this level of money.

    However I do hope I am wrong and they do get a sponsor, but are willing to offer everything to get one, even the corporate colourscheme.

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: Historical Airdromes/Air fields on UNESCO List #1263702
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    howz about stow maries aerodrome in essex, the sole remaining and largely intact genuine 1stww airfield anywhere in the UK!

    Another one is Hainault farm, similiar to the above site, but now in use by light industry!!

    tim
    :p

    This one interested me, so off to “Google”, and all shall be revealed:

    from http://www.angliamfc.org.uk/history.htm

    Biggin Hill, Tangmere, and Duxford, became familiar names to many during World War One, but how many would remember Stow Maries, Essex? Home to men of the newly-blooded Royal Flying Corps (RFC)–the field was known by the locals as Stow St. Mary, after the nearby parish church of St. Mary and St. Margaret. The name ‘Maries’ derived from a marshy area of the parish alongside the River Crouch.

    The aerodrome came into being in late 1914 when land was requisitioned from the Turner family at Edwins Hall and the Jones’ farm at Old Whitmans. Permanent brick structures began to take shape the following year. Although all the buildings were not completed until December 1918, by the time the first flying unit arrived in 1916 living conditions were good with airmen accommodated in barrack blocks on the western edge of the main site and catering facilities provided by a large canteen.

    A mess building for officers was situated on the very edge of the flying field. Other structures included motor transport sheds, fuel stores, blacksmith’s shop, generator building and water tower. Married airmen had to find local lodgings for their families — the provision of married quarters did not come into being until the 1930s Expansion Scheme.

    The only unit to occupy Stow (as it was usually called) was 37 Squadron RFC, which had formed in early September 1916 at the experimental establishment of Orfordness, Suffolk, flying BE.2s and BE.12s. The squadron headquarters was established at The Grange, Woodham Mortimer, and by September 15, its flights were dispatched to three Essex aerodromes. Their job was to combat the threat from German airships and aircraft as they attempted to reach targets in East Anglia and as far inland as West London. Upon receipt of orders, ‘A’ Flight moved to Rochford, ‘B’ Flight to Stow Maries and ‘C’ Flight to Goldhanger where it replaced the Royal Naval Air Service, then in the process of moving out………………..

    After closing down in 1919, it is surprising to many that the aerodrome was not re-opened to serve during World War Two – with its facilities still in place it could have fulfilled a useful role quite readily. Air Ministry surveyors inspected Stow early on in 1939, but the powers-that-be decided to update another World War One aerodrome, Rochford, some 12 miles to the southeast.

    Stow stayed under the plough – buildings on the technical site were used to house farm workers and the remaining structures provided storage and maintenance facilities for farm implements.

    No attempt was made to camouflage the site or obstruct the old landing areas, consequently it still resembled an active station from the air. This most likely contributed to it receiving its share of bombs and missiles during World War Two.

    The most notable of these occurred on April 20, 1941 when a pair of parachute mines dropped near to Flambirds Farm. They caused extensive damage to five of the technical site buildings lived in by farm workers and partially destroyed the northern aeroplane hangar. The farm workers were rehoused and the hangars finally taken down after the war, the timber being sold off locally.

    The only known aircraft arrival at Stow during World War Two was on September 7, 1940, when P/O Dennis Crowley-Milling of 242 Squadron force-landed his Hurricane P3715 ‘LE-M’ on the field after sustaining a damaged radiator in combat. The aircraft’s undercarriage was damaged and it was dismantled for recovery by road……..

    So what remains at Stow Maries from the days of World War One? Quite simply it provides the most complete example of a permanent aerodrome of that period. Its buildings have, almost miraculously, survived the vagaries of the English climate although the interiors of some barrack block buildings have suffered from their proximity to farm animals and vandals have left their mark in the Officers’ Mess washrooms. Thankfully, because the adjacent lounge area is now being used regularly by the aerodrome resident as a garage, the period fireplace built from Dutch bricks remains intact.

    The ‘other ranks’ canteen is now a corn batching and storage area, so its future seems assured, whilst in the very centre of the technical site some buildings are inaccessible due to the ever-encroaching undergrowth. The water tower also still stands proudly erect, surveying all around it.

    The Senior NCO’s quarters became a form of air museum in the late 1960s, mainly concerned with wreckology, as is evident from the remains of a V2 rocket engine venturi still lying in the grass nearby. Later it became the outdoor activity base for the local Scout group but since this came to an end the building remains empty at the edge of the field.

    How much longer the aerodrome will remain as a memorial to the gallant fliers of the embryo Royal Air Force cannot be determined. For now at least Stow Maries remains a place for which time itself has stood still.

    http://www.angliamfc.org.uk/images/site/carpark.jpg

    Its also on wiki > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stow_Maries

    and its own webpage http://www.essex-family-history.co.uk/stowaf.htm

    http://www.essex-family-history.co.uk/stowmariesairfield.jpg

    http://www.essex-family-history.co.uk/stowmariesairfield1.jpg

    and certainly worthy of National Heritage listing in the UK and even world heritage listing?

    Apparantly English Heritage investigated and reported the site in 1998 for the NHR?

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1263730
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    We jabbering onlookers face a challenge almost as great as getting the Vulcan back in the air.

    That is the challenge of expressing a single opinion, or making an observation on this project, whch has not been already been wheeled out five thousand times already, chewed over, spat out, tossed aside, dragged out again ad nauseam.

    It’s a shame they are not restoring a balloon instead, at least we could have helped them with a plentiful supply of hot air.

    It might be more interesting to examine the options as things currently stand (within the limits of our knowledge) and help to identify the best (or least-worst) outcome towards which the project could be steered.

    Although obviously a UK preservation movement concern, failure of the Vulcan project can have ramifications well beyond England, and it is hoped that it does secure the funding being sought.

    I understand the project was envisaging 10 years operation and then static display retirement, still in my mind a questionable return on investment of the £6M Heritage Lottery given that at the end of the time there will be the situation of future generations not seeing one fly, ( I understand the main justification of the project in the first place?)

    In fact one of the ongoing criticisms of many in our movement is that they seek projects to be flown/completed in their timeframes of need, – swoose goose etc (I believe JDK correctly referred to this attitude elsewhere as “self-gratification”) where-as preservation activities, especially of this cost and magnitude should perhaps be measured on a long term outcome not a short term outcome? (ie could the £6M Heritage Lottery be better spent on other aviation projects with lives and benefits far longer than 10 years?).

    However the massive heritage lottery funding to the Vulcan has created the opportunity for aviation heritage to be promoted and recognised next to other more traditional heritage activities, and lead to increased public and private donations for other projects in and out of the UK. (But similarly its failure will cast shodows over future Lottery applications and other ambitious projects)

    I havent followed this project thoroughly, but I get the impression Marshalls have been “employed” to undertake airworthiness work and therefore a £150k debt is outstanding with more costs of £50k pounds per month? obviously if those costs reduce dramatically after testing then it is some further short term financial hurdles to overcome.

    However if fuel, staff and maintenance costs are to incur £50k pounds per month or £600k annum for the next 10 years (another £6M raised??) these would certainly seem to be very ambitious sponsorship or fundraising targets, and one would question the original management plan evidenced to the Heritage Lottery that such could be delivered.

    Obviously the £6M Heritage Lottery contribution was intended to be a large ‘one-off’ to make the project viable in the first place, but the £600k annum is suggesting 10% of those costs are required annually, I couldnt imagine the Heritage Lottery will pick up the tab for that, nor the aviation preservation movement be pleased to see heritage funds continued to be directed to a single project, rather than spreading to other worthy aviation heritage causes?

    Perhaps Redbull might step up to the plate for a year or two if re-painted in their corporate colours, but without some type of brand advertising it is hard to imagine that level of funding being easy to secure? from anyone?

    I assume TVOC are offering those options to potential sponsors?

    I understand the long term plan was final landing at Duxford and donation/display there (however I understand the IWM already have a static display Vulcan??? – is there an intention / need to have two, or is the existing one in poor condition / incomplete and intended to be replaced/scrapped under that outcome?

    The “plan B” to retain sufficient funding, certification and support to ferry it to Duxford would seem to be something that TVOC should always have in place, to avoid it eventually being stranded elsewhere.

    I personally discount the possibility of sale to the USA, the US is struggling to secure corporate donations to the American aircraft there such as the CAF’s B29 Fifi, and the Shackleton has recently been grounded, unless a corporate colour scheme sponsorship in the US can have it tour/base there, I cant see it leaving the UK.

    Hopefully the project will secure funding, its failure will be greater than “just” the loss of the last flying Vulcan.

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: What to see around Brisbane #1263885
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    I did this tourist trip just before Xmas and offer the following additional comments.

    Within easy drive of Brisbane are quite a number of museums, etc.

    Near the city centre is the Queensland Museum with an interesting collection of aircraft plus the only surviving German World War I tank.

    The Queensland State Museum holds Bert Hinklers Avro Avian (first solo flight from England to Australia) and his Avro Baby, along with the remains of the Avro Avian “Red Rose”? from the ill fated Lancaster flight in the Sahara, (and was formerly the “Southern Cross Junior” when owned by Kingsford Smith

    At the airport is a memorial building with the Southern Cross inside. Near the airport is the flying Beaufort restoration project.

    The “little museum near the airport with a tri-motor in it” -as seen by Moggie, is indeed Kingsford-Smith’s Southern Cross, first to fly from US to Australia across the Pacific, the Beaufort restoration however is no longer at nearby Hendra and has instead relocated to Caboolture north of Brisbane by @3/4hr drive

    Archerfield did have the Flying Fighters Museum but that is probably closed. Presumably still there are Randall McFarland’s collection plus other vintage types.

    Most of the Flying fighters collection has been impounded by the Australian Tax Office but aircraft not associated with those aircraft’s owner are still at Archerfield.

    Amberley Air Base has a Canberra on the gate and some aircraft from the RAAF Museum inside (but inaccessible).

    Access to see the collection within RAAF Amberley can be arranged with the appropriate contacts (PM me), inside is a couple of Canberra’s, a Sabre, Mirage cockpit but most importantly, the rare USAF A20 Boston “Hell’n Pelican” restored by the RAAF and stored for future return to PNG

    To the west are Toowoomba where there may be some of Guido Zuccoli’s fleet still present and the Museum of Army Flying at Oakey.

    The Zuccoli collection is downsizing and its Boomerang donated to Oakey in anycase, which itself has a interesting collection including the Boomerang, Boxkite replica (from the “Magnificant Men” movie) Beaufort, Nomads, Bell 47’s, Pilatus Porter and Iraqouis.

    To the North are the Caboolture Warplane Museum and the Queensland Air Museum at Caloundra.

    Caboolure now has both the Warplane Museum with flying Mustang, Wirraway, static Hawker Demon fuselage, and the Flying Beaufort Restoration(this is not open on weekends)

    At Caloundra the Queensland Air Museum is well worth a visit with Ventura, Caribou, Spitfire, DC3, Gannet, Vampire, Meteor, Venom, SeaVixen, Drover etc, well worth the drive to see both – @ 1hr drive to Caloundra

    Tony Andrews

    The ANAM website links page has links to all of these sites (other than RAAF Amberley) for confirming opening hours. http://aarg.com.au/links.htm

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    in reply to: Historical Airdromes/Air fields on UNESCO List #1265164
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    Australian Aviation Heritage Sites

    Australia has a few important aviation sites, many are already on State Based heritage registers, or the Commonwealth list (that list is for sites owned by the Commonwealth or Federal Government and therefore outside the legal jurisdiction of the State laws and lists despite geographic location)

    Point Cook is currently the only aviation site listed on the Australian National Heritage List and has been under consideration for nomination to the World Heritage List.

    Other state or commonwealth heritage listed airfields include:

    RAAF Laverton
    RAAF Amberley
    RAAF Richmond
    Essendon – Melbournes original Civil airfield
    Ballarat airfield (former EATS airfield).
    Longreach (Qantas founders)
    Rathmines (Seaplane Base)
    Tocumwal (USAF base)
    Werribee Satellite Airfield

    and a number of these could be significant enough to be placed on the Australian National Heritage List along side Point Cook.

    Other Australian “Avaition” locations worthy of listing include:
    Cremourne Gardens in Richmond Victoria – site of first Hot Air Balloon ascent in Australia – 1858
    Stanwell Park NSW Boxkite experiments by Hargraves 1984.
    Narrebeen Beach NSW flight by Taylor of the first Glider in australia – 1909
    Diggers Rest – Victoria site of first controlled powered flight in Australia by Harry Houdini in 1910
    Spring Plains Mia Mia near Kyneton Victoria – site of first Australian designed/built aircraft to fly in 1910
    Altona Bay Victoria – site of first passenger flight, and first cross country flight, by JJ Hammond in 1911.
    Penrith NSW, site of (Hart’s) first flying School in Australia 1912

    Most of these are sites with little or no built heritage or buildings relating to the notable event, but are certainly of State Significance and very likely of National Significance, and it would be appropriate for them to be nominated ahead of their centenaries being celebrated in the near years.

    One which I am considering nominating myself (I have been directly involved in the listing of a number of sites including the nomination of Point Cook to the Commonwealth and National Heritage Lists and 3 other sites to lesser lists) is Ballarat Aerodrome, which is the most intact EATS school still surviving in Australia, as stated above it is already on the State Heritage List.

    The EATS program was a very important part of the Australian War Effort, and had a major impact on both the recruits and their families, but also the rural communities which hosted the rapid development of the EATS schools and flying programs, and therefore very likely to be successfully assessed for the National List.

    On the basis of the role EATS played in WW2, the site may well be suitable to a future World Heritage List, see below.

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    1 AIRPORT ACCESS ROAD MITCHELL PARK, Ballarat City

    VHR Number H2113

    File Number PL-HE/03/0656 [ Part 1 an

    Other Names BALLARAT AERODROME|BALLARAT AIRPORT|RAAF Buildings

    Municipality Ballarat City

    Extent of Registration All the land known as Ballarat Aerodrome marked L1 on Diagram 2113A held by the Executive Director.
    The features marked as follows on Diagram 2113A held by the Executive Director

    F1 Liberator Air Strip
    F2 Parade Ground
    All the buildings marked as follows on Diagram 2113B held by the Executive Director

    B1 Building 184 Propeller Test House
    B2 Building 132 Bellman Hangar
    B3 Building 133 Maintenance Workshop
    B4 Building 141 Parachute Hut
    B5 Building 189 Woodwork, Fabric and Paint shop
    B6 Building 188 Mechanical Workshop
    B7 Building 138/139/140 Equipment Stores
    B8 Building 274 Clothing store
    B9 Building 191 Operations and Crew Room
    B10 Building 190 Operations and Crew Room
    B11 Building 130 Bellman Hangar
    B12 Building 180 Bellman Hangar
    B13 Building 182 Flight Office
    B14 Building 131 Bellman Hangar
    All the buildings marked as follows on Diagram 2113C held by the Executive Director

    B15 Building 114 Boiler House
    B16 Building 212 Temporary Married Quarters
    B17 Buildings 116/117 Sergeants Ablution Block and Latrine
    B18 Building 125 Sergeants Sleeping Quarters
    B19 Building 118/119 Officers Ablution Block and Latrine
    B20 Building 126 Store
    B21 Building 111 Sergeants Mess
    B22 Building 115 Boiler House
    B23 Building 110 Officers Mess
    B24 Building 207 Laundry and Drying Room
    B25 Building 121 Sergeants Sleeping Quarters
    B26 Building 122 Sergeants Sleeping Quarters
    B27 Building 124 Sergeants Sleeping Quarters
    B28 Building 120 Officers Sleeping Quarters
    B29 Building 123 Officers Sleeping Quarters
    B30 Building 196 Officers Sleeping Quarters
    B31 Building 208 Garage
    B32 Building 213 Temporary Married Quarters
    B33 Building 210 Temporary Married Quarters
    B34 Building 211 Temporary Married Quarters
    B35 Building 107 Sleeping Quarters
    B36 Building 233 Radio Hut
    B37 Building 232 Emergency Power House
    B38 Building 112 Sergeants Sleeping Quarters
    B39 Building 113 Sergeants Sleeping Quarters
    B40 Building 154 Gymnasium
    B42 Building 234 Radio Hut
    B48 Building 209 Garage
    All the buildings marked as follows on Diagram 2113D held by the Executive Director
    B40 Building 154 Gymnasium
    B41 Building 170 Station Headquarters
    B43 Building 135 M/T Office and Workshop
    B44 Building 136 Barracks Store
    B45 Building 134 Barracks Office Store
    B46 Building 144 Latrine and Change Room
    B47 Buildings 20/30/61 Sleeping Huts and Ablution Block
    The structure marked as follows on Diagram 2113D held by the Executive Director

    S1 Elevated water tower
    Spatial Information -37.519003, 143.787085

    Heritage Act Categories Heritage place

    Statement of Significance

    What is significant?
    The former Ballarat Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Base on the site of the present Ballarat Aerodrome, 7 km northwest of Ballarat city centre was constructed in 1940 at the outset of the Second World War as a training school for Wireless Air Gunners under the Empire Air Training Scheme (EATS). The Scheme was established by the British with Canada, Australia and New Zealand to rapidly train air crews for the British Bomber Command to fight the then far superior German Air Force. Under EATS which operated from 1939-1945 the RAAF was committed to training 28,000 aircrew over three years including navigators, wireless operators, air gunners and pilots, equating to around 900 aircrew every four weeks. To achieve this the RAAF embarked on a rapid and extensive program establishing a network of 28 EATS schools in eastern Australia by the end of 1941, each specialising in specific skill sets required of air crew members. The former Ballarat RAAF Base was Australia’s No.1 Wireless Air Gunners School (WAGS), the first of three WAGS created under the Scheme and the only one in Victoria.

    By 1941 there were nearly 800 personnel on the former Ballarat RAAF Base and by the end of March 1942 a total of 1238 air men had been trained in the operation of radio equipment and guns using Avro Anson and Wackett aircraft. A radar training wing was also established at the former Ballarat RAAF Base in 1945. Basic training for wireless operators ceased in May 1945 by which time 5025 trainees has been through the school.

    In consequence of the United States declaring war on Japan in Dec 1941 a strategic alliance with Australia was formed and in 1942 the RAAF Base at Ballarat was extended to accommodate a Liberator Bomber Squadron to assist in the prosecution of the Pacific War and in the strategic defence of Australia. The US forces camped immediately south of the residential area of RAAF Base where they constructed the Liberator Air Strip for use by their B24 bombers, large planes for the long range bombing missions required in the Pacific. By 1943 there were 80 United States aircraft at the base.

    The Wireless Air Gunners School was formally disbanded in January 1946. The RAAF continued to operate the aerodrome until 1961 when it became the property of the Ballarat Council. The Ballarat Aerodrome continues to operate as a civil airport and the surviving Second World War structures on the site provide accommodation for a large number of community organisations including an aviation museum.

    The extant Second World War structures associated with the WAGS are primarily ‘P-Type Huts’ and Bellman Hangars neither of which were originally intended to be permanent structures, having been prefabricated and erected on military sites throughout Australia in response to the sudden and urgent need for semi-permanent accommodation for service personnel and for aircraft hangars at the beginning of the Second World War. The P-Type Huts, consisting of a simple timber and corrugated iron box with a gabled roof usually with doors at each end could be easily modified as required for particular functions. By 1941 approximately 160 standard P-Type Huts had been erected on the Ballarat site in two distinct functional precincts. In the northern aerodrome precinct around fifteen huts, of which twelve survive, were arranged on the outside of a group of four Bellman hangars arranged in pairs a few metres apart. Bellman hangars had been designed in Britain immediately prior to the Second World War to provide a fast, economical solution to the need for aircraft facilities. The surrounding P-Type Huts were used for equipment and clothing storage, maintenance and administrative functions associated with the operation of the aircraft. At the centre of the base was the administrative, domestic and teaching precinct where over 140 huts were erected in rows, singly or in combination with additional roofs to create larger buildings. They were adapted for various uses including sleeping quarters, recreation rooms and messes, lecture halls, radio huts, stores, offices, workshops and ablution blocks. Thirty four huts remain in the central precinct. These include the former Officers’ and Sergeants’ Messes, sleeping quarters, ablution blocks, Headquarters, the maintenance and transport depot, stores, the gymnasium and several ablution blocks.

    Other remaining fabric associated with the Second World War includes an elevated water tower, the foundations of demolished P-Type Huts and other structures and in the southern part of the site, the archaeological remains of the United States Air Force camp and the ‘Liberator Air Strip’. Landscape features associated with the former Ballarat RAAF Base include road layout and the playing fields and parade ground with its border of Monterey Cypress (Cupressus Macrocarpa) that separate the aerodrome precinct to the north from the central domestic and administrative precinct.

    How is its significant?
    The former Ballarat RAAF Base is of historical and social significance to the State of Victoria.

    Why is it significant?
    The former Ballarat RAAF Base is of historical significance for its ability to demonstrate the importance of military aviation to the defence of Australia and its Allies during the Second World War, the first conflict in which aircraft played a major role in combat for the Australian military.

    The former Ballarat RAAF Base is of historical significance for its association with the technical training aspects of the wartime development and operation of the RAAF. The former Ballarat RAAF Base is a representative example of the bases constructed to train aircrew under the Empire Air Training Scheme that included a contingent suite of temporary and semi temporary buildings that in their layout and surviving the Second World War fabric reflect both the training and domestic functions of the bases and the hierarchical nature of the military and domestic life on the Second World War bases. This contingent planning is clearly reflected in the two precincts of the former Ballarat RAAF Base – the aerodrome itself with the large prefabricated Bellman hangars and workshop huts, and the domestic and administrative precinct of standard P-Type Huts.

    The former Ballarat RAAF Base is the most intact surviving Victorian example of the training schools that were rapidly constructed across Australia specifically to train aircrews under the Empire Air Training Scheme in the early years of the Second World War and representative of the inventive ways in which functional requirements of the military were satisfied during the war. The Ballarat RAAF Base was the first of three Wireless Air Gunnery Schools established nationally under the Scheme and the only such school in Victoria.

    The former Ballarat RAAF Base is of social significance, providing an opportunity to educate about the operations of the Air Force throughout the Second World War, in particular the relationship of the Commonwealth allies against the German forces, particularly later in the war when personnel trained here were dispersed with others to serve with the RAF in Europe, and subsequently the increasing importance of the United States and Australian alliance during the Pacific campaign against the Japanese.

    in reply to: The XH558 Discussion Thread (merged) #1265311
    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    ……with the return of good weather at the beginning of March, but we still have to have £150,000 in our hands before we can do that,plus confidence that we will go on raising at least £50,000 per month after that.

    http://www.tvoc.co.uk/

    Is that correct, that this project expects to be successful in raising 50k-UKP per month or 600k-UKP per annum , is that ongoing, or just startup for a few months?

    (For Aust & US forumites thats near enough to raising $100k per month!! or $1.2M per annum????)

    Could cover and preserve quite a number of Vulcan’s indefinately for that, along with many other smaller aircrafts?

    A very ambitious technical project, and hats off to those who have achieved it, and secured the Heritage Lotterty, but this looks to be a very very ambitious ongoing fund raising project? and yet to be proven to be sustainable??

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington

    How long

    mark_pilkington
    Participant

    If there are obvious gaps such as this, then would this help to make funds available if a possible survivor is found? I’m thinking here of a rumour that part of a crashed Empire boat has been discovered in IIRC an Australian harbour.

    Havent heard of this one, other than the wrecks at Broome from the Japanese attacks, which included A18-10 “Centaurus”.

    Google lists two other possibilities:
    A18-12 – “Coogee” crash landed at Townsville during water landing – crew killed

    A18-13 “Coolangatta” lost at Rose Bay in emergency landing, -crew killed.

    Either may yield some remains as an artefact, but unlikely to yied a restoration project?

    I know of an Australian Museum who has it on their ICON list, and intend to explore a full or partial FSD etc, but I dont know what time plan that is on?, or any link to parts recovery?

    regards
    Mark Pilkington

Viewing 15 posts - 1,201 through 1,215 (of 1,652 total)