| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Tizer
|
 Posted -
21/12/2007
:
11:56
|
I have uploaded my first picture to the Barlick site I hope to be able to add it in this thread if/when it gets approval from Doc. It is a postcard from the 1940s entitled Winged Heroes and showing Hawker Hurricanes. (The picture is in the next post if you are on page 1 of the thread; if you are on another page you need to go back tp page 1 to see it.)
Please feel free to add your own stories, pictures or comments regarding everything to do with aeroplanes and their pilots, both past and present.
Edited by - Tizer on 11/11/2010 15:11:42
|
|
| Replies |
| Author |
|
|
Ribble Rouser
|
Posted - 21/01/2008 : 06:36
Yes, the clip is a cracker. The Wimpy goes up like a balloon. Love the commentary...we can’t reveal performance details etc.
it's bums that count 'ere; not 'ats  |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 21/01/2008 : 06:49
More pics the better....... Post away! As you all know, this isn't my field of expertise but being incredibly old I remember things. In 194/50 a plane was flying from A V Roe's factory at Woodford, often see over Stockport, appeared to be a lancaster with two jets replacing two of the engines. I think I was told it was a fying test bed for the new engines. Any info on this? I'd be interested.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
Ribble Rouser
|
Posted - 21/01/2008 : 09:46
Lancasters, Lancastrians and Lincolns were all used as test beds for Rolls Royce turbojets and turboprops; Nenes and Avons amongst them. Test engines were either mounted in the outer nacels, the nose or the tail:
Brief history of Rolls Royce flight test facility at Hucknall here: http://www.rolls-royce.com/history/heritage/offices/hucknall.jsp
Edited by - Ribble Rouser on 21/01/2008 09:59:15
it's bums that count 'ere; not 'ats |
Tizer
|
Posted - 21/01/2008 : 10:52
Thanks for identifying the Wellington prototype - that must be correct, even the swollen fuselage end is there. Myophoto doesn't relate exactly to any part of the clip shown on Youtube, but then there might have been much more film. The background to the full photo simply has hedges and low trees in the distance, no houses, but this could be a shot taken looking further down the field than we see in the clip. I suspect it was a still photo shot taken at the same event for RAF purposes. But it's great to know what the aircraft is and pleasing to have a photo of a prototype. I'll ask Ringo to change the caption for the photo in the database to say "Vickers Wellington prototype".
|
Tizer
|
Posted - 21/01/2008 : 11:33
More on the Wellington prototype, taken from several sources. The serial number on the tail of the aircraft in my photo I can now see is K4049, the same number as the prototype designed to satisfy Ministry specification B.9/32. It first flew as a Type 271 (and initially named Crecy) from Brooklands on 15 June 1936 with J. Summers as pilot. After many changes to the design, it was accepted on 15 August 1936 for production with the name Vickers Wellington.
On the web page http://www.miniplane.cn/Contributions/Braas/4041.htm
there is a picture of K4049 on 30th June 1936 during a display day at Brooklands. The nose and tail gun positions are still covered with fabric but the aircraft has RAF roundels. The same aircraft but showing the nose uncovered is here: http://www.sonsofdamien.co.uk/wellington%201.htm. Unfortunately, the aircraft crashed in April 1937.
I also gleaned this from a web forum discussion of Vickers test pilot Joseph "Mutt" Summers: "The Wellington was designed to meet Spec. B.9/32 and the first flight of the prototype, K4049, was made by Mutt, accompanied by Messrs. Wallis and Westbrook, designer and factory manager respectively, at Brooklands on 15 June, 1936. It was to have been called the Crecy, but the change to Wellington (to commemorate the Iron Duke), started the practice of using the initial letter W for Vickers aircraft that employed Barnes Wallis geodetic structures. Of course the first Wellington Mk I L4212 was also first flown by Mutt, on 23 December, 1937, as was the first Mk III, L4251, on 19 May, 1939." The forum thread is here: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=59536
and it has lots more about Mutt Summers and the aircraft he flew.
|
Ribble Rouser
|
Posted - 21/01/2008 : 11:40
I wonder if Mutt is at the controls when the photograph was taken? You might remember a couple of charming scenes in the film The Dam Busters, where the chracters Mutt and his good friend Barnes Wallis are featured several times together. One memorable scene is in the cockpit of a Wellington testing the new dam busting bomb, when Mutt makes a wager with Barnes that it won’t bounce. Who knows whether or not this is based on an actual conversation…or just film makers licence?
it's bums that count 'ere; not 'ats |
Tizer
|
Posted - 24/01/2008 : 18:10
This picture is from a postcard showing a crashed biplane, possibly a BE-2, in about 1914 to 1916. It was published in Picture Postcard Monthly (Nov 2007 issue, page 59) with a request for help with any information of where it happened and whose plane it was.
The caption in the magazine says:
"The card was posted at Cardiff on 3rd August in (possibly) 1914. The aircraft number (on the tail-fin) is 4174, and it originated from the Royal Aircraft Factory BE20 (David Oxford Collection)."
I have searched on the Internet but found only one bit of information. This was a two-post thread in the Great War Forum in 2006. The details there relate to aircraft 4174 and suggest that it is a BE-2 that crashed in Hampshire on 5th October 1915. Therefore the postcard was perhaps posted on 3rd August 1916 or a later year.
The posts are as follows (shown between two lines of asterisks):
***************************************
Great War Forum > The soldiers and armies of the Great War > The war in the air
BE2 crash Charter Alley
post Jul 30 2006, 10:17 PM
Post by MalcP
Hi there
Can anyone give me any further information about this incident? The plane's serial number is either 417 or 4174 and I think its a BE2. The place is Charter Alley, Hampshire (near Basingstoke) and I'm told the incident happened in 1915 when the pilot ran out of fuel - but I would like to confirm this if it's possible. Any help or information would be much appreciated.
Best Regards
Malc
Attached File Crash.jpg ( 52.53K ) Number of downloads: 0
[***This link no longer works***]
post Jul 31 2006, 12:07 AM
Post by mickdavis
My BE file has :-
4174 CFS Upavon by 3.7.1916 and crashed after collision with 5389 5.10.1916 (2Lt GPL Jacques killed).
5389 CFS Upavon crashed 5.10.1916 after collision with 4174 (Capt K Lucas killed).
***************************************
I presume Upavon (edge of Salisbury Plain) must have been the airfield where the biplane was stationed.
The full thread is here http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=56742
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 25/01/2008 : 06:38
Now you mention it I think I saw the one with the jet in the tail also. At that time A V Roe had a factory out at Woodford (near Stockport) and their own aerodrome.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
HerbSG
|
Posted - 25/01/2008 : 07:17
Seem to recall that RR flew a lancaster fitted out with a Tyne engine in the centre, cut the engines and climbed using the one Tyne, this was suupposed to be at an air show, possibly Farnborough.
HERB
|
Tizer
|
Posted - 31/01/2008 : 20:23
Now then - what's this? It was photographed at an air display at Duxford in the 1980s. A German aircraft of World War Two vintage - could it be a Messerschmidt Me 108? Note the long cockpit canopy - looks like a two-seater.
(Edit, 4 Feb 2008: since identified by RibbleRouser as a Pilatus P-2 aircraft, manufactured in Switzerland about 1945. See later in this thread.)
Edited by - Tizer on 04/02/2008 20:24:49
|
panbiker
|
Posted - 31/01/2008 : 21:23
Malcom commented on the picture that the Me 108 had the rear of the cockpit flared into the fuselage. I tend to agree, I have looked at numerous examples of the 108 and none have a cockpit like this, the undercarriage looks wrong too. Can't suggest an alternative yet Tizer but Malcoms stab with the Arado AR 96b is pretty similar.
Ian |
softsuvner
|
Posted - 31/01/2008 : 23:01
Chaps
I am only going from a quick look at my 1960 copy of "the Ian Allan book on Enemy Aircraft of World War 11" (not very PC that!).
The undercarriage looks much wider on Tizer's pic than the ME in mine. My one of the Aarado doesn't help, since it is an inflight one. Both those aircraft were made in Occupied France, and the French carried on with them after the war, so there were probably a number of variations.
Malcolm
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 01/02/2008 : 08:37
I can't tell you why but as soon as I saw it I thought Heinkel or Fockke-Wulf. An old memory surfacing?
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
Tizer
|
Posted - 01/02/2008 : 12:19
Not sure about the Arado - the tailplane seems to project beyond the tailfin, the opposite to the plane in my photo.
There are several Arados pictured on this site (and a range of interesting Italian aircraft too).
|
panbiker
|
Posted - 01/02/2008 : 19:14
The Junkers Ju 87 "Stuka" dive bomber, is almost identical in the cockpit design, undercarriage is similar but tailplane/rudder is wrong and you can see from the photo that it does not have the classic "gull wings" of the Ju 87. None of the Focke-Wulf variants have the same cockpit configuration, most have the cockpit flared into the fuselage as with the Me 108.
Edited by - panbiker on 01/02/2008 19:20:28
Ian |
Winged Heroes
