dark light

CanberraA84-232

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 230 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: What Type Of Aircraft Did You First Fly In? #1240330
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    Yes please!! Would love to see them.

    “Sunny VIII” was my actual first flight. Next up was a flying lesson in a Cessna 150, then an impromptu lesson in a Nanchang (both of which I ‘steered’ rather than piloted!), then I stopped counting as airliners entered the equation!

    Still looking, i moved house recently and they must be somewhere in the pile!

    thing i remember most about my 1st flight in a Cesspit was how utterly boring it was after the Mustang!

    for the record my 1st actual was as a patient in the aeromed chopper after being knock off my bike by a speeding driver at the age of 16, hence i dont count it!

    in reply to: HMAS Melbourne carrier #2077171
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    Many thanks the info Badger.

    Ive done a little more digging and found that they removed Melbourne’s entire flight deck for use as a training aid and that her basic hull was rumoured to still be extant in 2002.

    in reply to: What Type Of Aircraft Did You First Fly In? #1240725
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    Yes – I was bricking it though!! Rod Dean was the aircraft’s pilot, he and Nicola Rennie (who took care of Spencer Flack’s aircraft display logistics) looked after me very well (Nicola had flown up from Leavesden in the Mustang with Rod that morning – wow!!). “Sunny VIII” was of course destroyed in an accident in the US some years later. The sad thing about your first flight being in something like a Mustang is that most of what I have flown in since has been comparatively dull (although happily I have managed to get a Mustang fix or two since then!)!!

    great piccies there Davski, i will have to see if i can find mine from VH-BOB

    not my 1st actual flight but its the one i count as my 1st, my 1st actual is really not one that should qualify.

    in reply to: How would you equip the LCS-2? #2077234
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    If, the Austral/GD Design wins the USN Littoral Combat Ship Contract. How should it be fitted out? (i.e. Arms, Aircraft, Avoinics, etc.)

    the contract was awarded to the Tenix/Navantia bid in July 2007.

    ships are to be Canberra-class and will have a full flight deck with 13 degree ski jump, although they are employable as STOVL aircraft carriers no decision has yet been made if the RAN will gain a fixed wing air group.

    in reply to: Something a little diff for sale #1240786
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    I certainly like the internal cockpit colour -don’t know why. If there are any rich benefactors out there I have the space for a Mig 21!
    Paul

    There is actually a MiG-21 on the Australian register although it hasnt flown for some time now

    in reply to: Rolls Royce Avon serviceability today #1240980
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    The Avon is still in widespread use in the oil and gas industry and I have an acquaintance who runs courses on these and other RR industrial powerplants. It is credit to the Avon’s reliability that he describes the routine inspection system as “Maintenance by Binoculars”. If you can see heat coming from it, then it’s working. Just drive on to the next one.

    exmpa

    i do recall reading about an industrial Avon that ran for 463 continuous days and another that reached 53,000 hours before requiring a major overhaul, they must be tough little ******s

    in reply to: Did it survive! #1240996
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    Supermarine Scimitar,XD239, 800 Sqdn coded 103/R 13.5.63 L/C DF Mills diverted from Ark Royal to Khormaskar with radio and Hydraulic 1 intermittent failure. After 4 failed deck passes ,failed on first attempt at runway due to poor visibility,lost height in turn ,ejected, aircraft ditched in 6 ft of water. Wreckage shipped to Uk, Fleetlands. Sold as scrap 1967 to Birmingham Unimetals Ltd,

    Sounds like the salt water immersion did it in.

    in reply to: What Type Of Aircraft Did You First Fly In? #1169500
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    CAC Mustang A68-104/VH-BOB

    in reply to: Phifty Phabulous Years! #2499380
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    No argument about any of that, except one point, i.e. the question of what one describes as “in service”. My opinion is that one should compare like with like. The question that began this discussion related to the F-4, still in front-line service as a fighter & tasked with a combat role as a fighter 50 years after its first flight. I took the question as asking what else had matched that record, & named a few types.

    None of the types in the RAFs historic flight fit that description, so I don’t agree with comparing them, in their current role, with the F-4*. But I do get a thrill every time I see them fly over, & I fervently hope they continue flying for many more years.

    *Or any other type performing a similar role, or indeed any fighters relegated to non-combat roles but still on the military register.

    very true, i see yor point

    hmmm with the 50-year front surely the F-86 Sabre would go close? the Bolivian AF were still using them as theyre primary fighter in the 1990’s

    in reply to: PR.9 Canberras #1169787
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    thank you stormbird

    in reply to: Phifty Phabulous Years! #2499553
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    1) True. But I alluded to it elliptically before to point up the silliness of counting aircraft which are kept flying, & notionally in service, in non-combat roles. We really, really, can’t count historic flights.

    2). No, definitely not the oldest type. There’s an older one in the same unit :diablo: – though one of the Spitfires in the unit may be the oldest individual fighter notionally in service.

    1.) true within reason, but they are a useful PR tool for the RAF, i would say they definitely do have a place as being called in service, especially as they all retain theyre original serials and are operated on the military register.

    2.) I forgot the Hurricane!, but with that said there has been periods of time when none were flying with or on charge with the RAF, not so the Spitfire.

    in reply to: Phifty Phabulous Years! #2499555
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    An aircraft in a hangar, not flyable, not maintained, is in storage, not in active service. The Lebanese Hunters haven’t flown for many years (September 1983?), & aren’t flyable without refurbishment. I’d call them “involuntarily retired”.

    Proposals to return them to service (note the terminology) have reportedly encountered problems with obtaining sufficient spares to restore them to flyable condition. They also didn’t have any pilots, & last year were reported to be contacting retired former Hunter pilots.

    Definitely not in service of any kind, let alone active.

    I stand corrected

    in reply to: Phifty Phabulous Years! #2499573
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    What about Martin-Baker’s Meteors?

    AFAIK thay are the oldest fighters which are still in service.

    Technically the Spitfire is yet to leave RAF service, surely making it the oldest serving type in any capacity?

    in reply to: Phifty Phabulous Years! #2499575
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    Hunter didn’t quite make it – 49 years. Draken maybe – depends on the exact date the Austrians retired theirs. Certainly made it into its 50th year.

    Correction to you on the Hunter, it is still in active military service with Lebanon, also throughout its entire life its been in active service with at least 1 air arm at any given time

    in reply to: Anyone know what engine this is off? #1170291
    CanberraA84-232
    Participant

    It is from a Bristol engine (non sleeve valve) so my guess would be Jupiter, Mercury or Pegasus.

    Wellington?

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 230 total)