Mmmmmm. Could be something for local council planning departments to think about when they APPROVE buildings on and around established airfields (of any size). I am aware of a case, and I am sure it won’t be the only one, where a council chose to ignore safety advice. When something does go wrong, watch for the dust………… .
If someone ‘APPROVES’ something they must accept a level of responsibility for that decision and any subsequent outcome.
Just deleted the media from my browser, and don’t have a television is any case, so can now wait for the real professionals (the AAIB) to tell us exactly what did happened at Shoreham on Saturday.
No, I am not being an ostrich, just fed up with the so called experts – ex = was, spe(u)rt = short lived.
Sincere condolences to all involved.
Make it if you like, but I shall NOT be watching it. And that it a promise.
Feed him to the Lions. Let them have the final say. Easy.
Feed him to the Lions. Let them have the final say. Easy.
You have got to remember that the media are the experts on everything, including aviation. When they realize that they aren’t would someone please let me know then I can recover my TV from the local tip and re-instate my licence, all of which will never happen.
You’ve got it – I don’t have a TV, and life is much much better without. Try it.
Gentleman. I salute you. And, from the bottom of my heart, I thank you for all you did for our Nation.
Their names shall live for evermore.
Had to smile at your comment Mike, but how true of to-day.
Went to London Sunday (10th) to go to the VE+70 concert at the Royal Albert Hall and, by all good luck, managed to arrive in town in time to see a good part of the Veterans Parade. A good number of great people taking part, to all of whom we owe a tremendous amount of gratitude. Among those I saw was a very cheerful member of the ATA – Joy Lofthouse. She got a great cheer as she entered St James Park after the parade. Good to see you Joy.
And may I say, that the Police were just great that day . Well done and thanks for the help in getting around.
Oh how embarrassing, a coin with no shown value.
So, if the Royal Mint is to correct the coin. maybe they could also correct the presentation case at the same time.
I used to have a mug with that picture on and I think you’ll find the squadron code is DN rather than ON.
Ok, accepted Mike. On closer inspection it could be ‘DN’ and not ‘ON’. So, ‘DN’ was allocated to 416 (City of Ottawa) Squadron RAF / RCAF. This Squadron was formed at RAF Peterhead on November 1941, just a year plus after the Battle of Britain ended.
416 flew Spitfire Vb and IX.
So now we can explain the Oak Leaf, the aircraft and the Mark but still the link to the Battle of Britain …………..
And what about the main aircraft used in the battle, Hurricane or Spitfire? So it is still wrong, or should the picture depict both types?
And before anyone says anything, yes the Canadians did a fantastic job in the war and we are most grateful for all their help. Thank you gentlemen.
‘Artistic Integrity’ or some other expression is far more important to today’s dumbed down ‘values’ than accuracy or research.
Got it in one!
Longshot – I am not concerned about monetary value, just wanted something to give the children and grand-children with which to commemorate something important. So I will not being buying.
Yes, almost certainly they are Mk 9 Spitfires, and therefore were well post the B of B. Also it seems that Squadron code ‘ON’ was used by 11, 107 & 119 Squadrons during the war, and possibly 124 Squadron flying Mk VII HF (June ’43). And is that a Maple Leaf on the fuselage below the canopy? Did any of these Squadrons participate in the Battle?
Has anyone had a look at the rest of the ‘package’?
Fouga23
What are the black grills on the side of the engine cowling? You ask.
They are the air intakes / filters for the engine, a PT6 which has the prop / hot end at the front (see the jet pipes) and the air take at the back.
I can’t remember the correct name for the filter but the design was such that the air was made to swirl and thereby get rid of any moisture.
Ozplane -there was another aspect to the politics as well – who / where manufactured the Tucanos that the RAF had. Ooooops
Ah sweet memories of both Goodwood and Sandown. I was present for both first flights, in addition to being on the design team for both, especially the turbine version.
At the time that the turbine version was in contention for the RAF contract I was told that it was the aircraft that they wanted, although it had every chance of missing out due to politics. I seem to remember that the specification was for an ‘off the shelf’ aircraft. The Turbine Firecracker was still a prototype at the time, but those doing the evaluation knew that. At least it was a British design. So, in the end the Tucano was purchased, with a number of major modifications including a new engine. Hardly ‘off the shelf’.
If this is the case, then why was the subject not properly researched first? And the Hurricane……….