Don’t worry, I was just having a wind up. :dev2:

If memory serves me right, i think that the standard practice on the flight is that one of the Hurricanes always depicts a Battle of Britain aircraft.

If that’s the case they should have taken the opportunity to build the replica LF363 as a more appropriate Mk I Hurricane after the original was destroyed in the crash and fire.

I was giving this some thought and remembered that in the olden days the Lancaster PA474 which is currently being referred to in the media and by its millions of fans as “Thumper III” used to be known not by its ever changing port-side nose art identity but by its constant starboard nose art identity, “City of Lincoln”. I wonder why the BBMF have allowed this change to develop away from ‘City of Lincoln’ in media reports.

Most of us don’t have a fetish for remembering aircraft serial numbers. It’s a much less important identifier for me than a nickname and personal identity that people have given an aircraft which adds to its history and how it tells a story about the crews who flew in them.

For example the Lancaster at MOTAT in Auckland recently had its port identity changed from a nondescript, average No. 101 Squadron scheme that no-one had any connection with or affection for and its serial remains unremembered, to a much more memorable and identifiable No. 75 (NZ) Squadron scheme as NE181 “The Captain’s Fancy”, and now tells the story of the original aircraft that flew in these markings, its 107 ops and the men who flew in it.

Hello Charlie, I tried to PM this to you but apparently you have chosen not to receive PM’s from me. So I’ll posyt it here and then go. I need to tell you two things.

1) When I was composing my last message on that pointless Dambusters thread, I made several amendments in the composition of the text. After I had posted I realised that where I’d originally written “Charlie Hunt” simply so my post was directed back towards you, I’d accidentally wiped out your first name when changing some words in the text and it just read as Hunt. I was not intentionally referring to you just as Hunt, as if it was meant to be antagonistic. Sorry about that.

2) When I went back to altar the text I thought about it and quickly realised how pointless it is arguing such a pointless argument that the thread has become, so I decided to remove the post all together and not bother to take part in that thread in future, or any other on that forum regarding the film.

I’m sorry but I just get so bloody infuriated that so much energy is wasted by these opinionated armchair experts crapping on over so many threads about the unmade film and yet when I posted up an actual audio interview with an actual living member of No. 617 Squadron talking about his Air Force career and life and the Dams raid, and subsequent raids by the squadron over two free episodes, that thread gets hardly even a look and buggah all replies at all. Shows that people are not really interested in the topic, just the argument they can cause and keep blazing. Sod them all.

Regards
Dave

Modern day CGI special effects will be far, far better than the cheesy cartoon effects and obvious models of the original. Plus it will be in 3-D, and colour, and have more accuracy in the historical storyline. And how they are to make their money back is irrelevant. The money has been allocated, it’s there, the film is in production. It should do well enough, but even if it bombs for the studio life will go on – they’ve had a bomb before with The Lovely Bones, and are still making blockbusters since.

Why am I bothering, there’s no reasoning with the type of miserable pessimist who’s confident they know it all before they have even seen the film.

What’s the story with the WWI tank replica? Is it normally there at Old Warden? Sir Peter Jackson has a couple of them in his collection, they’re pretty cool machines.