Interesting, first I have heard of a second attempt on the Sorpe. I saw a Nat Geo Doco on the Dams raid and the Lancaster with the last bouncing bomb made around 7 attempts to fly along the width of the dam dropping the bomb somewhere in the middle but did little damage because the wall was more of a shallow wide slope. I had always wondered though how this could of worked with a hydrostatic fuse detonation. Remembering of course that a Lancaster had crashed earlier on land and found with the bomb still intact.

WOW! What Brilliant post. A V2 Engine as a garden ornament fantastic. More pics and history as well if possible please. Well done!

Great photo Andy. It looks like the engine has detached an spun around facing the nose of which is resting on the right wing, strange it looks like the top engine cowling is in place.

If these bases are no longer needed what’s the point of keeping them going, surplus to requirement’s. Mothballing would cost money in maintenance in other words dead money. Think about it at the start of WW2 Airfield’s sprang up all over the country almost over night. So if they were needed again it would not be a problem. I did my basic training in the RAF at Swinderby in 1967 the station is all gone now. No longer needed, now a housing estate, life has to move on.

I too am a big fan of Danger UXB Series. Thanks to Smirky for the link I didn’t know about that one. There is also this site loads of photo’s and info.

http://bombfuzecollectorsnet.com/page13.htm

XH558 Investigated for preforming banned barrel role. The aircraft itself refused to comment. :eagerness:

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/vulcan-bomber-investigated-over-banned-barrel-roll/ar-BBmOQA9?li=AA59G2&ocid=DELLDHP

I don’t have any experience with ILS/MLS CAT III operations, but I don’t think your comment about how computers can take off, fly and land planes anywhere in the world is entirely true (if I understood it correctly). Even under the right conditions (aircraft, crew and airport certified for CAT III ops), use of autoland is still subject to limitations and close human supervision.

I remember as far back as the late 1960’s A Boeing 707 took off from Heathrow and flew to New York and landed all by automation including flaps gear up and down etc. there were no passengers on board only one pilot who was there just for safety in case anything went wrong. The flight went perfectly well though the pilot was bored as he was not allowed to do anything. But the technology worked. even then they were talking pilotless aircraft. But I think, and quite rightly so the CAA Refused this idea making sure there were humans on the flight deck at all times. True these days automation has made the need for a flight engineer redundant.

There were sadly a couple of incidents in the 1990’s where the auto pilot handed the aeroplane back to the pilots they tried to sort the problem of the computer instead of flying the aeroplane manually with tragic consequence’s. Overall I think its a matter of good team work between the pilots and the computers. To some up, yes I think there must be at least two qualified people on the flight deck of passenger aircraft at all times.