dark light

Maple 01

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 411 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: History…representing the history or the airframe #1283504
    Maple 01
    Participant

    I get your point Eddie but wartime types are IMO a special case, when you consider that of the 7,377 Lancasters built, 3,249 were lost in wartime service it shouldn’t be too much of a surprise that any surviving examples are likely to emerge in Bomber Command colours, no matter how tenuous the link to the individual airframe. From the point of view of ‘local relevance’ (which smacks of narrow minded provincialism to me) surely the work-round is to tie in the repaint to a local squadron or individual rather than letting something rot or be scrapped because ‘it wasn’t built here, so has no local relevance’ – in the case of Bomber Command its very cosmopolitan nature should make proving those ‘local’ links very easy!

    in reply to: History…representing the history or the airframe #1283701
    Maple 01
    Participant

    Er….me next. As a rule I can see the value of maintaining aircraft in the colours they served in BUT many airframes that have survived didn’t have very interesting careers or are composites, for example there are so few “real” Blenheims about I have no problem with Bolingbrokes being painted in representative schemes – would anyone prefer to see a sea of RCAF target tugs or trainers? (That’s not to say there isn’t room for one or two.) I guess its all relative – Just Jane as a WU Frenchie? No, the RAF museum’s Tempest V as a Target tug? Maybe, various bits of Halifax, Noratlas and Hastings combined into the long extinct ‘Friday the 13th? Yes please.

    Oh bu@@er, beaten to it……

    in reply to: Significant Memorabilia #1292899
    Maple 01
    Participant

    I’ve got a cannon port and some panels from a Jag T2 that was being scrapped round about the time I was demobed and a suspiciously WW1 looking leather “flying helmet” and goggles from a flea market in Thame 10 years ago

    in reply to: WACO – Pronunciation? #1293317
    Maple 01
    Participant

    Wasn’t said gentleman shot down over Arnheim?

    in reply to: Best Preserved Airfield? #1300193
    Maple 01
    Participant

    RAF Gatow’s in good condition……

    in reply to: The Demise Of The TSR.2 (merged) #1314379
    Maple 01
    Participant

    The Australians decided against the TSR-2 becouse of the utter lack of faith put in it by elements of the British establishment.

    Mountbottom again, well documented

    http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/tsr2/history.php

    A BAC delegation had visited Australia and left with high expectations of an export order for the TSR.2; the Australians were very interested in the new wonder-plane. By this time Lord Louis Mountbatten had became famous within the industry for slapping ten photographs of a Buccaneer on a desk followed by a single picture of a TSR.2, and then stating that he could buy that many Buccaneers for the price of a single TSR.2. Then when an Australian delegation visited the UK, Mountbatten joined them to discuss the TSR.2. Afterwards the Australians had lost interest in the TSR.2; we shall never know what Mountbatten actually said, but it had obviously had a big effect, and the TSR.2’s export prospects had suddenly disappeared. The Australians chose to buy the F-111 shortly afterward. That this would cost 10 times more than they had been told and would be 10 years late into service was not something they expected.

    in reply to: RAF Oulton dump #1321071
    Maple 01
    Participant

    RAF Oulton Norfolk? If so I’m up for a recci

    in reply to: The Demise Of The TSR.2 (merged) #1321415
    Maple 01
    Participant

    If the TSR2 had entered service in the RAF how would that have changed things?

    IMO any government prepared to fund the TSR2 would be unlikely to cancel the Navy’s follow-on carriers so the Argentine government would probably have been unwilling to even consider going anywhere near the Falklands faced with the possibility of two well armed and equipped carrier groups bobbing around in the area with AEW/ASW support.

    A efficient and forceful sales team unhindered by the likes of Mountbottom and politicians with dubious agendas might have been able to flog a fair few to our NATO allies (in place of Tornado) and the Colonials (F1-11s) so the whole thing could have potentially paid for its self (as the Canberra did I believe)

    Thirty years of fine tuning and the subsequent development of a replacement could have kept the British aircraft industry at the forefront of loud noisy pointy jet production rather than ‘makes a few bits of Airbus’ or ‘has to cobble together a consortium of loud and troublesome foreigners who want to keep changing the rules’ 🙂

    in reply to: End of a Spitfire – for Mark 12 #1324364
    Maple 01
    Participant

    Red’s link leads to an extended clip of the Hunter OCU film which has been used in the production of the Hunter Video I’ve got from which I took the screenshots of Mark12’s Spitfire being hacked to death…….with me so far?

    Disk in post tomorrow Mark12 – Now does anyone have a full copy of the Hunter film?

    in reply to: Hilarious Mistakes On Screen #1325853
    Maple 01
    Participant

    AAMs that do “U” turns

    I’ve seem footage of Python 4 trial where the missile does a 180 off the launch rail! (it was working as advertised)

    in reply to: Canberra bombing radar/ Blue Shadow radar? #1241998
    Maple 01
    Participant

    Isn’t that why Canberras have a (plexi)glass nose?

    in reply to: Hilarious Mistakes On Screen #1246059
    Maple 01
    Participant

    Just to back-up the point that directors sometimes ignore expert advice to make something out of nothing I was involved as an extra in a film shot at Gatow back in the early 1990s – so memorable I can’t think of the name or who was in it, I suspect it was straight to video. Anyway there is a scene where the hero steps off a USAF VC-10 (yes, VC-10) to an honour guard and flag-waving reception only to be fired upon by a sniper hidden on the hangar roof.

    Anyway the man shouts ‘action’ the sniper fires and the honour guard scatter – cut, he’s not happy, why arn’t they trying to take aim? The commander of the guard of honour which is made up of real servicemen is an ex-Swinderby drill instructor and points out that honour guards aren’t live armed and therefore would be too busy running away to play Rambo – director is not happy and in take two the honour guard point 20 empty carbines at the stunt man – utter rubbish but ‘it looks good’

    Also remember the same strutting director being told to ‘*******off out of it by the owners of the VC-10 when he decided to light his cigar under the wings, he got very shouty but backed down when they said they’d take the bloody thing away if he didn’t stop being an ass…..

    in reply to: When was the last Spitfire Scrapped? #1262964
    Maple 01
    Participant

    On a Hunter DVD which I can’t find at the moment there is some footage of Air-to-ground firing in a T7 (poss 145 Sqn) – the target seems to be a late mark low-back Spitfire – and as the footage is in colour it can’t be much earlier than the early 1960s

    in reply to: Brigands – When did they go out of service? #1267115
    Maple 01
    Participant
    in reply to: Good Luck Kemble #1267282
    Maple 01
    Participant

    I think you need to step away and look at both sides of the arguement.

    er…no, move next to an airfield, don’t be surprised to see and hear aircraft – if I moved to Slough could I demand the M4 be closed because of noise?

Viewing 15 posts - 241 through 255 (of 411 total)