Thanks Gents,
Reading http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/valiant/history.html, would I be right in thinking that the Vickers 660 deignation only applied to the first prototype WB210? I was about to say that, since this aircraft was lost in early 1952, I presume that the aircraft pictured above is more likely to be a Vickers 667, so probably the second Valiant prototype WB215. I notice, however, that this piture of WB210 (http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/valiant/full/hitchwb210.jpg) shows a similar small registration on the fuselage and a bright metal finsh overall.
If that is the case, then this picture can probably be dated to between May 1951 and the aircrafts loss on 12th January 1952.
Shame this picture, and another which is very similar are too small and too fuzzy to read the registration.
I’ll have a bit of a play with the scanner and software for the next picture…
I certainly can’t offer that sort of photographic quality, only that these have never been seen before.
If no-one objects too much I’ll post some here from time to time. What’s the recommended format/size resolution? I clearly need to get the image size sorted out!
Anyhow, here’s the first pic. Enlargement of subject, camera shake evident. A/c serial number not legible. Caption is “Valiant 660” and I presume its taken at Hurn sometime in 1952.
Originally posted by Denis
There was also the Dornier DO17 that gently landed itself at Shotley Essex during the B.O.B, the crew bailed out somewhere near Salisbury I think.
There was also a Do217M from KG2 whose crew baled out over Middlesex whilst the a/c ‘landed’ near Cambridge (January 1944). Neither are mentioned in Kenneth West’s ‘Captive Luftwafe’ althogh in one of Bill Gunston’s books he says the Do217 was flown by the RAF.
I seem to recall a pic of one of these perhaps from one of the Then & Now series?
Oh, that’s what a good photo looks like :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Dave Homewood
From that RAF website it seems like the ugly version with huge protuberances at each end like some mad tumourous growths no longer flies. I always used to wonder how it got off the ground; how the pilots could see while taxiing; and how on earth they could do that to the beautiful Comet!
Ugly? Don’t know how you can say that…
XZ286 at Farnborough mid-1980’s. (Sorry about the quality…another one of my Dad’s snaps)
OK….
Umm….
You’ll have to excuse me, not being a regular and all, but isn’t that a bit silly?
🙁 We looked for ages at that facade. Does it actually open?
Originally posted by Hatton
True but all of the above contain/will contain at least one aircraft therefore the money spent on the building has directly gone to the preservation of the aircraft. A roof over the head of an aircraft is vital and the importance of this goes hand in hand with the restoration of aircraft. Im sure you would agree.
Just a passing ordinary person who sometimes likes to look at old planes…
At the risk of going off-topic, the American Museum at Duxford is a rubbish peice of architecture in that it fails to fulfill part of its function. It keeps the planes nice and dry but they’re covered in concrete dust (aggressive to aluminium) and the lighting is hopeless. Additionally, there’s no impression of scale in the building – the B52 just doesn’t seem as vast as say the Vulcan in Hangar 1. Thank you.
I really sorry to hear about the RAFM’s Beverely. I remember being awed by it as a kid in the mid-70’s.
Dave Holwood’s post
http://forum.airforces.info/showthread.php?threadid=24134
probably has the answer ….Toward the Unknown (UK “Brink of Hell”)
1956
Thanks Dave