dark light

Kenneth

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 843 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: How many types have been lost? #1191203
    Kenneth
    Participant

    Several thousand Gotha Go 145 were built and only a fuselage frame survives today..

    Kenneth
    Participant

    I know the KZ.VIII isn’t active (but will be again hopefully) and not sure if they are all sole survivors.

    The other KZ-VIII (OY-DRR) is airworthy in Denmark. As are the last KZ-X (OY-AOL) and the sole surviving Miles Mercury. The airworthy Gloster Gauntlet in Finland also fits into this thread…

    in reply to: The "Wot Plane" Thread. (Game rules in Post #1) #1162112
    Kenneth
    Participant

    Just a hint for those posting the quiz photos (particuarly the Brochet and the KZ’s): Entering a registration in Google will in many, many cases reveal the type of aircraft…..!

    in reply to: The Airlift to Biafra #1196157
    Kenneth
    Participant

    If any potential publisher reads this: I have the (Danish) book and it’s great! I’m sure an English version would find huge audience.

    in reply to: Scrapyard Photos; Any More? #1202452
    Kenneth
    Participant

    I’m happy to revise the location, however my photo came from a usually impeccable source and I was going by his note on the back.

    The location is with 99.9% certainty the southern part of Copenhagen-Kastrup. The buildings in the background are still there – or were there until very recently.

    in reply to: Rans S6, S9 and S10 #431900
    Kenneth
    Participant

    Thanks for the input! I know Kitplanes and I was an EAA member for almost 20 years. I was however looking for an objective opinion, and in Sport Aviation in particular everything is wonderful and fantastic with hardly any criticism…

    in reply to: Focke Achgelis FA330 #1203732
    Kenneth
    Participant

    What an interesting piece of gear. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

    Mondariz, there’s one in Denmark as well, should be in the museum at Egeskov Castle (or possibly in Helsingör)….

    in reply to: Tom Blair's Collection (Merged) #1205065
    Kenneth
    Participant

    It’ll be great, fantastic even, if the CAA eventually does allow the Flug-Werke machine to commit aviation in this country, and good if someone in the UK acquires her, but if it goes abroad to somewhere the legalities are a little more relaxed?

    Well, it’s not as if the rest of the world is inundated with performances by these aircraft… I think only one has ever flown, and only on a couple of occasions (and never at a public event).

    in reply to: de Havilland 88 #1220863
    Kenneth
    Participant

    Just wanted to add:

    The above stories told me something about building an aircraft. Learning to fly has forever put me off dodgy designs with tricky flying qualities. If I were to pilot an aircraft for travelling from A to B at a predetermined date and time then I wouldn’t want anything which doesn’t have full IFR instrumentation, full deicing capabilities, at least one turboprop engine and a pressurised cabin….

    in reply to: de Havilland 88 #1220867
    Kenneth
    Participant

    I think Atomic deserves praise for having taken into account the advice given in this thread. Something which sets this thread apart from others asking advice for similarly impossible “projects”….

    One can’t blame youth for having such aspirations. I wasn’t any different, thinking at the age of 15 that it wasn’t a question if I would once own by own airworthy Harvard, rather than when.

    I joined the Danish equivalent of the EAA a couple of years later and started learning:

    I got to know someone who build a LongEz. During the building process his wife left him. Then his partner crashed it and he bought the partner out and repaired it.

    Then I met someone who at the time (about 20 years ago) had been working for more than 10 years on another LongEz. It still hasn’t flown. The same applies to a Lancair 360 that an acquaintance of mine has been working on for 15 years now.

    The other people I knew built an RV-4 in a reasonably short time scale, only for one of the partners to crash it a couple of months after its first flight. That happened at about the same time as I watched two people give up a Jodel project which they had purchased with the major component (the wing) already finished. The latter is a pretty impressive (read: daunting) structure…

    All of the above aircraft are well known designs for which complete plans or even kits exist….

    I now fly a rented 3-axis microlights (FK9) after having started out with a PPL (Bölkow Monsun, C172, C152, PA28). Lack of space, family and work commitments and many other issues probably mean that I will never build or restore an aircraft, as I had hoped for. But I can fly and I do fly, and what I fly is something which is not unfeasible for an individual to purchase. Much more so than a Harvard, a replica SE5a, a Grinsvald Orion or whatever else I had on my mind those many years ago. I learned something.

    in reply to: Bristol Bulldog flight info #1223763
    Kenneth
    Participant

    With the Bulldog having been used in Denmark, the Danish State Archives may possess some material as well (they have a large caché of Hawker Nimrod drawings…): http://www.sa.dk

    The same applies to the Danish Air Force Historical Collection: http://www.flyhis.dk

    in reply to: Less Common Transport Aircraft #1226897
    Kenneth
    Participant

    Both of the completed KZ-IV still survive in Denmark; one is airworthy and based at Stauning and the other is on static display in Helsingör. And the model was made by Tekno (which no longer exists) and you pay through your nose for a good one these days!

    in reply to: Question #432084
    Kenneth
    Participant

    It signifies the ATIS transmission he has monitored prior to contacting the tower (or approach) controller. This contains the QNH/QFE, runway in use, various met information and other pertinent information.

    I was told to be a bit more precise about it:

    – “Munich Tower, Delta Foxtrot Delta Mike Echo”
    – “Delta Mike Echo, Munich Tower – go ahead”
    – “Delta Mike Echo, a Bf 109 VFR from Ingolstadt, 10 miles north of reporting point November at 3,500 feet, request clearance to enter the control zone via November for landing, information X-ray received, QNH 1025 HPa [the QNH in the ATIS must be repeated]”

    in reply to: eurofighter prototype #1236104
    Kenneth
    Participant

    DA1 has been in the Flugwerft in Oberschleißheim near Munich for a couple of years. Think it was the first of the prototypes to go on museum display.

    in reply to: The Burnelli saga. #1167797
    Kenneth
    Participant

    Just for you, ESTOL, again. As we all know, most accidents occur during take-off and landing and it’s easy to see that much slower speeds at both ends, alone produces a major automatic safety device?

    Then we’re back to slow cruise speeds and which airline would want that? And just exactly what is “ESTOL” as opposed to “STOL”? What kind of takeoff and landing distances are we talking about?

    Burnelli didn’t have to address this problem, production of his aircraft never reached that stage. At the time, he was happy with the fact that passenger seats were securely mounted, so had no reason to do further studies.

    So we’re talking about an immature design then? Somebody, if not Burnelli, would have had to address this problem to make it viable! And by the way, a “securely mounted” seat does not necessarily absorb energy!

    Many of his patents have been copied,…

    Possibly, but you’re missing my point. Nobody copied his lifting body design – in practice and succesfully! Why?

Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 843 total)