OH COME ON! 🙂
Was that REALLY the “Golden years of the British Aircraft industry” as Albert Ross declares and has it REALLY been “down hill ever since” ?
Or, as Steve Young says…………….
“Ah, them was the days. Back when we actually had an aircraft industry…”
Let’s be realistic here, look at the 47 types illustrated, how many made any sort of a profit or were anywhere near a success? Most of them were not wanted by anyone and simply vanished into obscurity. How many of these companies existed purely because we had just fought a six year war of national survival when we needed every aircraft we could lay our hands on, that situation was a one off and the number of companies soon diminished because they couldn’t produce products that anyone actually wanted.
To compare 1948 to now and claim it as some sort of Golden era is a nonsense, it may have been fabulous to see all these different types and an enthusiasts dream, but don’t kid your self that this was a SUCCESFUL British aircraft industry because it wasn’t.
Todays British Aerospace industry is a global player and very profitable, it may not be as much fun to watch, but it is better and does what a company is supposed to do, the ONLY thing a company is supposed to do and the only reason it exists———–it makes a profit.
Denis,
No problem whatsoever with the wealthy individuals who own warbirds, without them there would be no warbird movement. I was just trying to apply a bit of a perspective on North Weald and to see the place in the cold light of day.
As to it’s present local use, well, if ALL those users are keen to keep the place as it is, and local residents opposed to developments had better start making a case to the present owners or it WILL end up as a domestic development, after all there is a crying need for housing in the South East and it is classed as a brownfield site and development IS to be centred on brownfield sites, QED?
Sorry but I just don’t think it is as important as some are making out.
Wasn’t there a ground swell of local opinion against aircraft noise? Wasn’t that why the Vulcan was canned as a display item one year after local complaints? Are you sure there is a MAJORITY of local residents who want to preserve it as an airfield?
Nighthawk,
Is it a thriving airfield, is it REALLY? I would love to see it remain if it is, I just don’t think it is, sorry.
As to the truth hurting, sorry I won’t dignify such racist rubbish with a reply.
Ewan Hoozarmy,
“And yet if it was a religious temple of some dodgy sect, then I’m sure it would stay!!!!”
What a ridiculous zenophobic racist thing to say. It’s also total rubbish!
Just how significant or useful is North Weald? There is virtually nothing left of it’s wartime days, it is not exactly over used as an airfield, it’s proximity to Duxford makes it unviable as an airshow location, it’s proximity to Stanstead makes it unviable as an airfield with any sort of intensive flying at it. It has been abandoned by the RAF since the mid 1960’s, was virtually derelict and disused for years, and now provides a home for a small number of warbirds for the use of wealthy private individuals and something called “The Squadron” that exists in totally unrepresentative buildings, ironically enough it is sited right next to some fighter pen remains that no-one has made any attempt to restore or preserve and on event days are used to park caravans and the like in.
After all, every operational airfield that existed in 1940 in the South part of England is a “Battle of Britain” airfield, you can’t preserve them all for what was a very brief moment of history, preserve their memory by all means, but to keep them as they were is just not possible.
Don’t forget that just up the M11 you have a wonderful example of a fully preserved Battle of Britain airfield with a far more distinguished history and a thriving museum and warbird presence, is it at all feasible to have two so close together?
A big thankyou to whoever first suggested the Battle of Britain movie and insisted they use as many real aircraft as possible, the resulting collection virtually kick started the current warbird movement.
They’re going to do a half and half restoration of the Hampden- WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????????
What is it with that place? Why do they insist on filling the place with wrecks, half complete restorations or wholly inappropriate and totally irrelevant exhibits?
They have a very rare Mark 1 Anson, what do they do with it? They mount it on a Queen Mary trailer and leave it half complete and in bits!
They have a unique Westland Wallace and they leave it half finished as the wings are “not available”
They have an empty shell of a Beaufort-WHY ISNT IT FINISHED???????
Why is it that if you want to see as Halifax, a Hampden, a Hudson or a Canberra B(I)8 in a condition representative of that in which they served with the RAF you can’t see one in this country as the RAF Museum apparently can’t be bothered?
Kye,
“makes everything worth while” How on earth does it do that?
A lot of what is being said on this thread would make perfect rational sense if this was a type that existed in abundance, if there were complete examples elsewhere in the RAF Museum or with other collections then it would be a noble exercise that would have real impact, but there aren’t and to pretend that this was the idea all along is laughable.
Go and find what the RAF museum was saying when they recovered it back in 1972, there was no mention THEN of leaving it as a wreck, it was to be fully restored to take its place alongside the Lancaster and Wellington as an example of a very important type within WW2 Bomber Command.
How come the Battle was restored, why wasn’t that left in the state it was found? That is a magnificent restoration that enables current and future generations to see what a fully operational Fairey Battle was like in representative squadron markings, we are deprived of a similar opportunity with such an important type as the Halifax.
There are some very noble and worthy sentiments being expressed here in defence of the state of this display item, I fear that expediency and money were far more important drivers resulting in the state of the UK’s only extant Halifax.
Hendon is a real curate’s egg as far as restorations go, there are magnificent examples, the Battle, the Thunderbolt, the Lancaster, then there are aircraft that are mere empty or incomplete shells like the Beaufighter and the B-25. I just find the Halifax a crying shame.
LesB,
My last on the B (I) 8’s as well, though I’m dammed if I’m going to mention P-51’s, damm, just did!
The Valiant Tactical Bombing Force (TBF) was the 3 squadron wing of Valiant’s at Marham from 1960 to 1965. It was the only element of the V-Force to be actually declared to SACEUR until the V’s lost their strategic deterrent role in 1969. Along with the B (I) 8 and 6’s in Germany they were SACEUR’s only manned tactical all weather nuclear strike element. When the Valiant fleet was grounded there was no replacement for the TBF which left the RAFG Canberra’s as a unique SACEUR asset.
By the time I got to RAFG all this had changed with the NATO switch to flexible response from the nuclear tripwire policy of massive retaliation.
Interesting what you say about weapon stockpiles. As the Phantom, Buccaneers and Harriers were phased in from 1971 on there was a huge move of conventional weapon stocks into RAFG, even after this we were constantly being rebuked by SACEUR as we only held stocks for 6 days intensive operations against the NATO target of 8 days. That by the way was the national state, not just RAFG, 6 days worth of munitions and other expendables!
Steve Bond,
Couldn’t agree more! Of all the cancellations of the late 50’s and 60’s that was the one that hurt. It would have been a natural follow onto the Hunter, could have sold into NATO to resist Lockheed and the F-104 and would have been a platform with real development potential.
The P1154 was NEVER going to work, we don’t possess the technology even today to do supersonic plenum chamber reheat. The AW or HS681 was also a ridiculous concept for it’s time, especially in the VSTOL mode, and you know what I feel about the TSR2!
The P1121 however had REAL potential.
But that was cancelled by the Conservative Gov’t and that doesen’t fit well with the myth of Labour nnd Healey bashing that accompanies the TSR2, P1154 and HS681 saga.
What?
LesB,
Agreed, we have rather diverted this thread off topic, but what the hell, here goes!
The B(I)8 force may well have practiced mud moving but I can assure you that it was only ever declared to SACUER as a part of his General Strike Force and this ONLY had a nuclear role, all or nothing!
This partly came about because of SACEUR displeasure at the UK not replacing the Valliant’s that were declared to him, as the Tactical Bomber Force, when they were retired when the Valiant was grounded. He was ALREADY miffed at the UK as they had previously replaced 64 Nuclear strike Canberra’s declared to him with just 16 Valliant’s but as each Valiant was to carry 2 nukes as opposed to the 1 in a Canberra he was prepared to go along.
This is why the RAFG B(I)8’s hardly ever actually were used in the out of area reinforcement role, SACEUR was very reluctant to let them go!
There were no stocks of conventional weapons held for the B(I) 8 or 6 force in Germany other than a training provision. The advent of Phantom and Buccaneer, all dual declared as Strike (Nuclear) and Attack (Conventional) meant a massive investment in conventional weapons, before that the only missions planned were one way singleton B(I)8 sorties with one nuke a piece. These were the singleton missions you saw the guys constantly practising.
I took over a target folder set when I arrived, only one weapon, only one target, only one mission planned!
SteveO,
2 small nukes in the lay down mode, a variant of what the Tornado and Vulcan carried.
LesB,
The Canberra strike Squadrons in RAFG only had a conventional capability for out of area overseas reinforcement tasks, their role in situ was nuclear strike purely, there was no way they ever would have been committed in anything but a nuclear role in Germany
As to the Hunter, what on earth do you mean by “apart from the obvious Hunter squadrons?”
There were TWO Hunter FR squadrons in Germany with a complement of 8 FR10 aircraft a piece! Hardly a “significant ground attack capability” now is it.
The large numbers of Venom FB4 and Hunter DFGA Squadrons were all cut by Sandy’s in 1957 when RAFG went over to a purely nuclear retaliation and deterrent role. They also had a GA capability of cannon only!
As to what you say about the Typhoon, the UK industry DOES have decades of experience and production behind it in projects such as Jaguar, Tornado, Harrier/Sea Harrier, EAP. There was also a very considerable amount of UK industry involvement in the UK F-4 programme.
I went out to RAFG on one of the first RAF F-4 Squadrons, believe me, the improvement in that Commands capabilities when the small single role Hunter/Canberra force was replaced by a larger multi role Harrier/Buccaneer/Phantom force was incredible!
TSR2???????????????????????
Please stop all this hysterical myth propagation!
Politics did not “kill this baby,” cost and the economy killed the TSR2. The RAF could barely afford 50 of them, it would have crippled the forward equipment programme for a decade or more. It was designed for one thing, to be a fast, low level nuclear strike aircraft with a reconnaissance capability, if it had worked, which at the time of cancellation it didn’t, it would have been entering service just as NATO was changing from massive nuclear retaliation to flexible response, i.e. a change from the nuclear trip wire to a period of warfare with conventional weapons. TSR2 would have been no good at that, a small internal bomb bay and very small wing area meant it was not exactly capable with a conventional warload. It was also largely planned to be based in the Far East, even Dennis Healey said that if we had to pull out of Singapore it would have been based in northern Australia or on island bases. Again, by the time it would have entered service the UK was pulling out of the Far East as part of the withdrawal from East of Suez policy.
So it would have gone to Germany as a Canberra B(I)8 replacement.
If TSR2 could have been made to work it would still have had a devastating effect on the UK aviation industry, if it had continued there would have been no Tornado, largely a UK design with a very large number produced, arguably there would have been no Eurofighter Typhoon, again largely a UK design with a large production run, so we would have been left with a run of 50 TSR2 and no money for anything else, and let’s not kid ourselves that anybody else would have bought it!
There would have been no RAF F-4 Phantoms or Buccaneers, all very capable aircraft with a useful amount of work for UK Plc. RAF Germany in the Canberra B(I) 8 days was purely nuclear, it had no conventional ground attack capability, TSR2 would have done precious little to amend that, and we would have been able to order far less than the 170 F-4’s and 100 odd Buccaneers we eventually ended up with.
So please, face facts, it was not the disaster it has been made out to be, it’s demise led to the closing of the BAC factory at Luton and cutbacks at Weighbridge and Warton. If it had continued then the closures and cut backs would have been far worse just five or ten years later.
Even the Tories were talking of cancelling the project prior to the 1964 General Election so you can leave off Dennis Healey!
Arthur and Indian1973
Nonsense!
Thatchers first round of defence cuts were in 1980, she was only elected in 1979!
A round of financial cutbacks canned the planned 3rd Lightning squadron, scrapped development of the active Skyflash AAM, scrapped HMS Bulwark, reduced flying hours across all three services and cut back on spares, fuel and munitions.
All this in 1981, maybe the height of the Cold War?
Don’t try and re-write history guys.
Papa Lima,
The RAF is substantially larger than the Swedish Air Force. That is before the reductions in the Swedish front line just announced that will take them far far lower.
Indian1973,
Prior to the statement on Wednesday the RAF had;
Operational Squadrons;
7 Tornado GR4 plus an OCU
4 Tornado F3 plus an OCU
3 Jaguar GR4 plus an OCU
3 Harrier GR7 plus an OCU
2 Fast Jet OEU
1 Typhoon OCU
3 Nimrod MR2 plus an OCU
1 Nimrod R1
2 Sentry AEW1
1 Sentinel R1
1 Canberra PR9
1 C-17r
1 VC10 K3/4
1VC10 C1K
1 Tristar KC1/C2
2 Hercules C1/3
2 Hercules C4/5
3 Chinook HC2
2 Puma HC1
3 Sea King HAR3
1 Merlin HC3
2 Hawk T1
After the announcement it will lose;
All Jaguars
1 Tornado F3 Squadron
The equivalent of 1 Nimrod MR2 Squadron
6 Puma HC1
PILOTGHT,
The French armed forces are largely conscripts, with all those people you still do not possess a front line anywhere near as capable as the RAF!